![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
oyceterSpoilers for all four books
I'm rereading these as Wiscon prep, so these are notes mostly for myself.
Steerswoman
I think what I'm most interested for this book is the question of knowledge and truth... The book doesn't push on the cases of the steerswomen encountering different situations; we have Rowan deciding to not pursue how Will makes his bombs because he says the knowledge might be dangerous, but that's an individual judgment on her part. Granted, it seems as though there could be a steerswomen philosophy imparted during the academy, but given how uncentralized the order is, I doubt it. So my questions are mostly about knowledge and the uses of knowledge.
The one part that disturbed me the most was Bel's torture of the wizard's man, particularly in light of today's political situation. Rowan doesn't do it, no, but Rowan knows how, and Rowan was going to before Bel stepped in. It reminds me of the doctors and psychologists involved in the torture at Guantanamo, but of course, steerswomen don't seem to have a version of the Hippocratic oath.
Other things I was thinking out: no one questions the right of steerswomen to know, save the wizards, who are clearly on the bad side. This is, of course, a socialized thing, and it becomes a larger issue in the next book. It reminds me of issues regarding science and research and Native sovereignty, and how the claim of pursuing scientific observation can and has been used in unethical ways. I am also wondering about the foundation of knowledge, of what is assumed and what is not. The book of course has Rowan questioning some assumptions, such as the wonderful bit where she figures out orbit, but not others (the existence of magic, etc.). I'm trying to draw lines between this and real-world scientists who have made faulty assumptions and operated on those, and on the skience of race and etc.
Then of course there is the female/male dichotomy of steerswomen/wizards—we see a female wizard, but the rest seem to be male, and we know steersmen are rare. In one way, it's nice to have the science figure played by women. On the other, it fits a bit into the evil male scientists and the women who prevent that; the wizards have power and do not have to explain it to anyone. Still, at least the women who prevent it are also scientists.
Random race notes: Kirstein says that eye and skin color are randomly assigned to people; Corvus' dark skin and dark hair (and blue eyes a la Storm) are rare and high prized. It's nice that attributes associated with dark skin and hair is something like gentleness and good breeding or something, but still off-putting in that I think he is the only POC? Rowan is described as very tan from the sun, and I don't think we get much of Bel.
Outskirter's Secret
I was a little hesitant to reread this; I remember it being my favorite of the four, and yet, on recollection, it could have turned into a What These People Need Is a Honky tale. Thankfully, it mostly doesn't.
The Outskirters are an interesting amalgamation of the traveling tribe trope in much of fantasy; they can be read as Native sometimes but not always. I do get a little tired of Rowan still being surprised by Outskirter use of sophisticated language, though at least it's pointed out all the time. I feel the -dotter and -son in Outskirter names is based on European tradition? But I am not sure. It's also interesting that they use metric instead of English. Then there's the interesting part in which they are at war with the land; they do everything they can to destroy it, which feels very not-Native? I am not sure; I do not know enough.
I very much like that Bel is the one to rally the Outskirters against the wizard threat. Rowan didn't really even think of it. Also, Bel is the one the Outskirters are impressed most by; in her poem, she is the heroine, and Kirstein notes that while people like Rowan and Will, they are most wowed by Bel going among the foreigners and coming back to tell the tale.
This book also starts bringing in more complexity to the steerswomen code. Rowan does not ask Bel for information that will betray Outskirter raiders, she notes to the Face People seyoh that she would challenge him to a duel and kill him or die before giving him the names of people in her adopted tribe to be used against them, and before she knows how the Outskirters will take her questions, she asks first if it is something she can ask.
The beginning of the book is more awkward to me... the Outskirters may not be POC, but I sympathize with the portrayal of people not in the "mainstream," and the focus on the alien-ness of the landscape is understandable but still a little annoying for me. Clearly we're getting just Rowan's POV, but then I start wondering why the more Euro-centric civilization is the POV civilization and etc.
Then I keep running against the questions I had in the first book about if the quest for knowledge is always justified or not, particularly given real world cases in which Native people are lied to and their blood is taken for research purposes. Rowan for the most part does not do anything like this, but in the end, when she's explaining to people that Inlanders and Outskirters came from the same origins, Bel reacts very poorly, as does the Face Person seyoh, and it reminded me a great deal of the blood case in which science is used to disprove Native origin stories. Yes, it is also used against Christianity that way, but the power imbalances and abuses thereof make it not the same.
There is also the fact that in the end, the Outskirters and their lifestyle are in the book as a puzzle to be solved, which discomforts me, especially in the revelation as to why their customs are the way they are. Yes, it's nice to have a reason for Face People cannibalism that isn't just "they're savages," but something about it still makes me nidgy. We do get enough of their culture and their lives to know that even if environmental stuff is the real raison d'etre for their lifestyle, it is not the sole one, but still. Plus, there is an uncomfortable closeness to them being the people who clear the land for "actual" human habitation, a la Wrede's statements about Thirteenth Child.
And there is the fact that Rowan, by virtue of her steerswoman training, ends up knowing more about the Outskirters than they know about themselves. This really bothers me. A lot. There is something there about the power of knowledge and who gets it and self-determination and how science can be used to objectively determine a truth that people do not believe in (Your culture/language/ways are uncivilized and just wait, I will prove it to you!) that I do not think is adequately examined in the books.
I am also unsure of how I feel of Fletcher and that he is the main focus of the last bit of the book. It feels very similar to narratives of people "going native," and the focus on him and not on the Outskirters. Much as I like them, Rowan, Bel, and Fletcher are the most fleshed-out characters, and we actually do not get as much Rowan-Bel conversation here. So our POV is a non-Outskirter, and one of the main characters in terms of plot movement is also a non-Outskirter.
Finally, there's Rowan's revelation of Outskirters and Inlanders being from the same origins.
Spoilers for Water Logic
Given that the Outskirters are portrayed as more Other to Rowan, our POV character, that the Inlanders are the ones who are constantly taking more land and colonizing it, and I think the frequent assumption that nomadic tribes are less "civilized" and do not really "own" land, I am bugged by this. It's the same reason I am bothered by the big reveal in Water Logic.
First, I do not think coming from the same origins should be that important. It is in this book because it gives hints as to worldbuilding and where they all come from, but in Water Logic it functions as the Big Reveal, and in this book it is a fairly large reveal as well. Plus, it is a large reveal that specifically discomfits some Outskirters and goes against what they believe about themselves. I do not think it should be important because I feel origins are less important than later cultural development of differences.
Second, I am annoyed because I feel like I have seen this kind of reveal done more than twice, and it always has the overtone that because the people are from the same origins, they should therefore work together and maybe not discard their differences, but at least focus on them less. And given that it is used to bring the colonizing Sainnites and the colonized Shaftali closer together in the Logic books and that I feel it's used in this to have the Outskirters see that their fates are tied with those of the Inlanders... well, it bugs me. It feels a little to me like white people saying stuff like "Oh, we're all human, blah blah blah, why must you see race/insist on cultural differences/be so annoyingly not like me?" Or, in the case of the Sainnites and the Shaftali, "Look, you guys were colonizers too a loooong time ago, so stop trying to talk to us about how we are currently colonizing you!"
Other POC who have read either of the series, what do you think?
In the end, although I still love these books, I feel like they sometimes read as a white geek paradise. I sympathize with this greatly and totally want to be a steerswoman, but there is a way in which Kirstein does not question the right to pursue knowledge that feels very much like white geek entitlement to me, particularly when it is related to culturally sensitive subjects. There is something about the open source ideology here that assumes that knowledge is open to all and that is the way it should be (that's why the steerswomen are so annoyed by the wizards) that is extremely alluring and that I completely buy into at times, but is also potentially problematic as well. Knowledge can only be as open as systems of power allow it to be, and it hinges on all groups having the same access and knowledge about all groups being equal, which is simply not the case.
Rowan, thankfully, does not pursue knowledge when it will be harmful, but she is an individual, and I do not think that restraint is built into the structure of the organizations in the books. Of course, I have completely forgotten about what happens in the next two, so that will be interesting to look at!
ETA: and hey!![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif)
delux_vivens just posted about respect for Hopi knowledge!
I'm rereading these as Wiscon prep, so these are notes mostly for myself.
Steerswoman
I think what I'm most interested for this book is the question of knowledge and truth... The book doesn't push on the cases of the steerswomen encountering different situations; we have Rowan deciding to not pursue how Will makes his bombs because he says the knowledge might be dangerous, but that's an individual judgment on her part. Granted, it seems as though there could be a steerswomen philosophy imparted during the academy, but given how uncentralized the order is, I doubt it. So my questions are mostly about knowledge and the uses of knowledge.
The one part that disturbed me the most was Bel's torture of the wizard's man, particularly in light of today's political situation. Rowan doesn't do it, no, but Rowan knows how, and Rowan was going to before Bel stepped in. It reminds me of the doctors and psychologists involved in the torture at Guantanamo, but of course, steerswomen don't seem to have a version of the Hippocratic oath.
Other things I was thinking out: no one questions the right of steerswomen to know, save the wizards, who are clearly on the bad side. This is, of course, a socialized thing, and it becomes a larger issue in the next book. It reminds me of issues regarding science and research and Native sovereignty, and how the claim of pursuing scientific observation can and has been used in unethical ways. I am also wondering about the foundation of knowledge, of what is assumed and what is not. The book of course has Rowan questioning some assumptions, such as the wonderful bit where she figures out orbit, but not others (the existence of magic, etc.). I'm trying to draw lines between this and real-world scientists who have made faulty assumptions and operated on those, and on the skience of race and etc.
Then of course there is the female/male dichotomy of steerswomen/wizards—we see a female wizard, but the rest seem to be male, and we know steersmen are rare. In one way, it's nice to have the science figure played by women. On the other, it fits a bit into the evil male scientists and the women who prevent that; the wizards have power and do not have to explain it to anyone. Still, at least the women who prevent it are also scientists.
Random race notes: Kirstein says that eye and skin color are randomly assigned to people; Corvus' dark skin and dark hair (and blue eyes a la Storm) are rare and high prized. It's nice that attributes associated with dark skin and hair is something like gentleness and good breeding or something, but still off-putting in that I think he is the only POC? Rowan is described as very tan from the sun, and I don't think we get much of Bel.
Outskirter's Secret
I was a little hesitant to reread this; I remember it being my favorite of the four, and yet, on recollection, it could have turned into a What These People Need Is a Honky tale. Thankfully, it mostly doesn't.
The Outskirters are an interesting amalgamation of the traveling tribe trope in much of fantasy; they can be read as Native sometimes but not always. I do get a little tired of Rowan still being surprised by Outskirter use of sophisticated language, though at least it's pointed out all the time. I feel the -dotter and -son in Outskirter names is based on European tradition? But I am not sure. It's also interesting that they use metric instead of English. Then there's the interesting part in which they are at war with the land; they do everything they can to destroy it, which feels very not-Native? I am not sure; I do not know enough.
I very much like that Bel is the one to rally the Outskirters against the wizard threat. Rowan didn't really even think of it. Also, Bel is the one the Outskirters are impressed most by; in her poem, she is the heroine, and Kirstein notes that while people like Rowan and Will, they are most wowed by Bel going among the foreigners and coming back to tell the tale.
This book also starts bringing in more complexity to the steerswomen code. Rowan does not ask Bel for information that will betray Outskirter raiders, she notes to the Face People seyoh that she would challenge him to a duel and kill him or die before giving him the names of people in her adopted tribe to be used against them, and before she knows how the Outskirters will take her questions, she asks first if it is something she can ask.
The beginning of the book is more awkward to me... the Outskirters may not be POC, but I sympathize with the portrayal of people not in the "mainstream," and the focus on the alien-ness of the landscape is understandable but still a little annoying for me. Clearly we're getting just Rowan's POV, but then I start wondering why the more Euro-centric civilization is the POV civilization and etc.
Then I keep running against the questions I had in the first book about if the quest for knowledge is always justified or not, particularly given real world cases in which Native people are lied to and their blood is taken for research purposes. Rowan for the most part does not do anything like this, but in the end, when she's explaining to people that Inlanders and Outskirters came from the same origins, Bel reacts very poorly, as does the Face Person seyoh, and it reminded me a great deal of the blood case in which science is used to disprove Native origin stories. Yes, it is also used against Christianity that way, but the power imbalances and abuses thereof make it not the same.
There is also the fact that in the end, the Outskirters and their lifestyle are in the book as a puzzle to be solved, which discomforts me, especially in the revelation as to why their customs are the way they are. Yes, it's nice to have a reason for Face People cannibalism that isn't just "they're savages," but something about it still makes me nidgy. We do get enough of their culture and their lives to know that even if environmental stuff is the real raison d'etre for their lifestyle, it is not the sole one, but still. Plus, there is an uncomfortable closeness to them being the people who clear the land for "actual" human habitation, a la Wrede's statements about Thirteenth Child.
And there is the fact that Rowan, by virtue of her steerswoman training, ends up knowing more about the Outskirters than they know about themselves. This really bothers me. A lot. There is something there about the power of knowledge and who gets it and self-determination and how science can be used to objectively determine a truth that people do not believe in (Your culture/language/ways are uncivilized and just wait, I will prove it to you!) that I do not think is adequately examined in the books.
I am also unsure of how I feel of Fletcher and that he is the main focus of the last bit of the book. It feels very similar to narratives of people "going native," and the focus on him and not on the Outskirters. Much as I like them, Rowan, Bel, and Fletcher are the most fleshed-out characters, and we actually do not get as much Rowan-Bel conversation here. So our POV is a non-Outskirter, and one of the main characters in terms of plot movement is also a non-Outskirter.
Finally, there's Rowan's revelation of Outskirters and Inlanders being from the same origins.
Spoilers for Water Logic
Given that the Outskirters are portrayed as more Other to Rowan, our POV character, that the Inlanders are the ones who are constantly taking more land and colonizing it, and I think the frequent assumption that nomadic tribes are less "civilized" and do not really "own" land, I am bugged by this. It's the same reason I am bothered by the big reveal in Water Logic.
First, I do not think coming from the same origins should be that important. It is in this book because it gives hints as to worldbuilding and where they all come from, but in Water Logic it functions as the Big Reveal, and in this book it is a fairly large reveal as well. Plus, it is a large reveal that specifically discomfits some Outskirters and goes against what they believe about themselves. I do not think it should be important because I feel origins are less important than later cultural development of differences.
Second, I am annoyed because I feel like I have seen this kind of reveal done more than twice, and it always has the overtone that because the people are from the same origins, they should therefore work together and maybe not discard their differences, but at least focus on them less. And given that it is used to bring the colonizing Sainnites and the colonized Shaftali closer together in the Logic books and that I feel it's used in this to have the Outskirters see that their fates are tied with those of the Inlanders... well, it bugs me. It feels a little to me like white people saying stuff like "Oh, we're all human, blah blah blah, why must you see race/insist on cultural differences/be so annoyingly not like me?" Or, in the case of the Sainnites and the Shaftali, "Look, you guys were colonizers too a loooong time ago, so stop trying to talk to us about how we are currently colonizing you!"
Other POC who have read either of the series, what do you think?
In the end, although I still love these books, I feel like they sometimes read as a white geek paradise. I sympathize with this greatly and totally want to be a steerswoman, but there is a way in which Kirstein does not question the right to pursue knowledge that feels very much like white geek entitlement to me, particularly when it is related to culturally sensitive subjects. There is something about the open source ideology here that assumes that knowledge is open to all and that is the way it should be (that's why the steerswomen are so annoyed by the wizards) that is extremely alluring and that I completely buy into at times, but is also potentially problematic as well. Knowledge can only be as open as systems of power allow it to be, and it hinges on all groups having the same access and knowledge about all groups being equal, which is simply not the case.
Rowan, thankfully, does not pursue knowledge when it will be harmful, but she is an individual, and I do not think that restraint is built into the structure of the organizations in the books. Of course, I have completely forgotten about what happens in the next two, so that will be interesting to look at!
ETA: and hey!
delux_vivens just posted about respect for Hopi knowledge!Tags:
(no subject)
Mon, May. 18th, 2009 06:52 pm (UTC)Your comments make me uncomfortable, which is often a sign that someone is on to something, so these might be defensive "OMG I love these books shore up the barricades!," but:
As a preliminary matter, the Outskirters initially pinged my European buttons through "barbarian" and Bel's style of poetry, and my mind got set that way, so whatever you saw as suggesting them as Natives slid off me. I'd be interested how other people read them. (I don't remember the details of the second book very well.)
I think Rowan doesn't try to convince the Outskirters of her conclusions, after Bel's initial very negative reaction? I remember them still disagreeing about it in book 4, I think.
What do you think about the flip side, not gaining knowledge but spreading it? I think of the fourth book when Will gives the townspeople bombs and promises to come back if he can and teach them how to do it themselves, to level the field against the wizards and take control of their own lands. It's a little honky-ish but I think that withholding information as dangerous (or just upsetting?) also has problems.
Finally, everything in the series is a puzzle to be solved, though I realize that the Outskirters not being treated differently than anything else may not make it better.
Finally finally, I agree with you about the torture.
(no subject)
Mon, May. 18th, 2009 07:12 pm (UTC)I... don't think Rowan pushes it too much, which is why the books are still just slightly nidgy to me and not "ARGH!!!" And I do like that Kirstein points out that it doesn't just discomfit Bel; Bel outright rejects it (and there's a line saying Rowan pursues it, too caught up to worry about insulting her friend). Ditto with Rowan copying down all the names in Efraim's line and Bel being very disapproving of that. Rowan doesn't bring it up after that, but... nidgy.
I think there's also just that there is no case of people outright refusing to tell Rowan something. Rowan isn't the type who would push them to, as evidenced in the book, and I see it as an idealized form of the anthropologist interacting with the "natives," in which she wins their trust. And I know it's not the story Kirstein is writing, but it feels like there is a lack of stories in the SF I've read (which is very little, so feel free to contradict) about a scientist/anthropologist type who goes in to find out things about an alien culture and gets rejected, as it happens in RL.
Hrm. I have thought a little about spreading knowledge, but not as much. Mostly I was thinking of it in terms of the article on un-inventing the atomic bomb and the diffusion of knowledge, how so far we've touched more on anthropological discovery and less on actively hurtful discovery. It'll be interesting to read in the fourth book!
(no subject)
Mon, May. 18th, 2009 07:16 pm (UTC)And yeah, on one hand, level playing field against wizards & treat like adults who will do right thing (after Will makes them promise not to use on people), on other hand, inherently dangerous and violent tech. It's all pretty complicated.
a scientist/anthropologist type who goes in to find out things about an alien culture and gets rejected
Arrgh arrgh arrgh I can't remember the third book well enough arrgh!
(no subject)
Mon, May. 18th, 2009 07:21 pm (UTC)Oh yeah! I remember I had a question about the title. Who is the Outskirter with a secret? All signs pointed to Fletcher for me, who is honored as an Outskirter in his death, but then it's that problematic bit that outside of Bel, he's probably the most memorable character in a book all about the Outskirters. I wonder why it was "The Outskirter's Secret" and not "The Outskirt's Secret."
Ha, I completely don't remember the third book at all, except that Bel's not in it. I insanely requested it via ILL, decided I couldn't wait, then ran off to another library this morning, got a new library card, and snagged it. Whee!
All my qualms aside, the series is doing very well for a reread--Kirstein mentions the Face People's cannibalism in book 1 (I wonder if it was a detail she figured out the worldbuilding for later, or if it was always there), and all the reveals seem fair and not cheats at all. Except maybe the swordfight in which Rowan realizes Fletcher is a wizard's man, and it switches from names to pronouns. That felt slightly cheat-like, even though it was explained as Rowan disassociating from herself and just analyzing.
(no subject)
Mon, May. 18th, 2009 07:27 pm (UTC)I can't decide now if it would be too spoily to talk about the Outskirts having a secret, which is unusual compared to a person having a secret, because of the aforementioned lack of recollection.
I wonder if I can squeeze in a re-read so I can do a Bittercon post this weekend? Probably not. But maybe in time to respond to anyone who writes up the panel.
(no subject)
Thu, May. 28th, 2009 06:32 am (UTC)(no subject)
Mon, May. 18th, 2009 07:28 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Mon, May. 18th, 2009 07:26 pm (UTC)Well, one of the wizards, I believe, refuses to tell Rowan something, as does wassname, the "lost steersman" (and both fall under the ban). But I agree that's a different situation than with the Outskirters. Rowan is
a bittoo perfect: she's very good at knowing what not to ask, so that the individual doesn't reject her and then fall under the ban.(no subject)
Mon, May. 18th, 2009 07:29 pm (UTC)Which is not to say that Rowan might not be too perfect anyway. At least she's shown as working at it constantly.
(no subject)
Thu, May. 28th, 2009 06:28 am (UTC)(no subject)
Mon, May. 18th, 2009 07:30 pm (UTC)(no subject)
Mon, May. 18th, 2009 07:53 pm (UTC)how science can be used to objectively determine a truth that people do not believe in
I do remember thinking that there was no good way this could end, that while the scientifically-objective truth that is clear to the readers would position the Outskirters more acceptably to the Inlanders, it would overturn important beliefs of the Outskirters, and there didn't seem to be any way around the pain that would cause them.
Maybe there is; I don't know. But I pre-emptively regret it.