Science Fiction Aficionados discussion

it is August and so we continue with the next installment of the wonderful Vorkosigan Saga.

this one features a new protagonist: Dr. Ethan Urquhart. according to my best friend Wikipedia, he's the "Chief of Biology at the Severin District Reproduction Centre on the planet of Athos... Athos was founded and maintained as an exclusively male-populated planetary colony, and a planetary religion and ideology supports this single-sex structure."

I will miss Miles but this book sounds fascinating already!

I liked this one (and thought I might not because of the missing Miles). Of course, Ellie Quinn kind of took his place in some ways -she is a neat character and I'm glad to see her again. I love that she has a crush on Miles as well - I wonder if he knows....

Sorry to be so late in responding....I went to wi-fi and have had a lot of trouble being able to post...

I loved this one as well Suzanne...the whole concept of the planet Athos was really novel to me.

I was not so taken with this one. I kept thinking of being trapped in a planet that only acknowledges one sex and one sexual orientation.

Ethan's discovery of the wider universe and how his planet is viewed was very well done. Being a true believer, he returned home, but with a clearer understanding of the contribution women have to the whole 'survival of the species' subject.

I would like to see what new generations of Ellie and telepath genes does to the general population.

This is my least favorite. No Miles! I need to reread, though...

I'm reading the series in spanish, and the prologue to this novel by Miquel Barceló, director of Ediciones B Publisher's Sci-Fi collection NOVA, shares an interesting anecdote where Lois McMaster Bujold herself told him that she considered "Ethan" her best novel (at least until the date they wrote each other: 1989), despite not been so successful; he actually quoted her:

"Ethan of Athos is a somehow marginal sequel: Elli Quinn, a minor character from "The Warrior's Apprentice" and "Brothers of Arms" is the hero. The novel centers in doctor Ethan Urquhart's problems, an obstetrician from a planet only for men and forbidden to women. I feel really proud of "Ethan of Athos"; maybe it's my best science fiction work and the one with the most original ideas. However, it could be said that there's certain resistance in the market towards an homosexual hero. Apparently women appreciate more the humorous characteristics of this novel

I guess that back in the 80's such a resistance in the market might have existed, but reading this novel today, the fact that Ethan is gay is just a natural progression of Athos's culture, a detail that actually makes the character more believable, and more human.

There's something undeniable interesting in a woman writing about a world without women; were misogyny is rampant, and actually "logical" because comes from a social fear inoculated by some unknown "Founder Fathers" and not from real hate towards women. It's that society's defense mechanism; and Ethan learns, without having to recur to obnoxious sermons or in-your-face scenes how false it is. And we know he learnt it, without him or the narrator having to tell us.

McMaster Bujold, at least for me, really stands out as an iconic and unique Sci-Fi writer with this one; because armed with her womanhood built a truly believable argument, which I dont't think would have come so easy for a male writer if the roles were reversed, and we know the only-for-women planet, island or land cliché is an old one in the genre.

thanks for the post, Bernardo. you have really stoked my interest in reading this one. maybe starting tonight.

That was a neat insight Bernardo - thank you! I felt like in the book there was a lot of fear of women rather than hatred of them, and I certainly thought parts were humorous.

I agree, Suzanne and Bernardo, that it came across as fear arising from lack of contact with women rather than hatred. It was humorous because it seemed a little like what in the U.S. we call in grade school a "girls have cooties!" attitude, without any underlying sexual tension.

My opinion of this book has evolved considerably. When I first read it I was enthralled with Bujold's swash-buckling Miles and was horribly disappointed to find him missing in action. But upon re-reading it I began to see some of the richness of the points she is making about parenthood and sexuality. What I find quite interesting is the concept of all those men who have no choice but to be homosexuals. Pity the poor heterosexual born on Ethos! Yet, what would the concept even mean to them? And on a certain level, is she not implying that sexuality is environmentally determined?

That's an interesting question. COULD anyone born on the planet even be heterosexual because women just didn't exist there except as a very abstract concept. Nobody knows what they look like, etc. So is it a uni-sexual (my made-up term) society maybe?

Alexa wrote: "My opinion of this book has evolved considerably. When I first read it I was enthralled with Bujold's swash-buckling Miles and was horribly disappointed to find him missing in action. But upon re..."
Alexa I believe that Bujold establishes that no all men choose to live a homosexual life, some of them have their children but live in chastity throughout their all life.
But is an interesting question the one you propose, how would sexuality be defined in this case? Some heterosexual will be compelled to act as an homosexual because doesn't know anything else?

Yes, but those men who are abstaining - are they doing so because nobody around them sparks their interest, or out of a sense of renunciation - sort of like a monk? They were founded by a monk-like order, so I get the impression that chastity is considered a noble goal, yet not one that average people expect themselves to live up to. It is also interesting how monogamy is respected but not expected.

Alexa wrote: "Yes, but those men who are abstaining - are they doing so because nobody around them sparks their interest, or out of a sense of renunciation - sort of like a monk? They were founded by a monk-lik..."

I think is a little bit of both, and that's what makes your question so interesting: if they don't even know how women look like, will never meet one, maybe don't even know what's their role in their reproduction, how will they live their sexuality if they don't feel any attraction to men? Maybe is not monk-like, is just asexuality... they just don't feel the need at all.

I don't think that Bujold implies that sexuality is environmentally determined,as of someone forced to be homosexual in Athos but would have been heterosexual if would have known women and was exposed to them. I think that she implies that such a person will just be asexual.

I just finished this one tonight. sad to say, it is my least favorite so far. I don't think Bujold did too great a job thinking this one through, mainly around what has been discussed in the past few messages.

I sorta wish I had actually read those messages before I wrote my review because I think one of the problems/questions I had is discussed here: even images of women are verboten! so I guess that's why heterosexuals on Athos aren't unhappy? they don't know what they are missing? their heterosexuality then turns into asexuality? is that even possible? that just feels off to me. for a place that is painted in fairly benign terms by Bujold, that is really disturbing. sexuality that is not healthily processed creates emotional disturbance in humans. is this why the Athosians seem so child-like? the novel raises many questions but I don't think that is the point of the novel. which in my opinion makes it a rather weak novel. there is so much going on in the background that doesn't make sense, yet all of the plot is on Kime Station and so it feels to me like Bujold thought of this idea, didn't think it through, and didn't care because that's not what the story is even about.

I do think she is saying that sexuality may be environmentally determined and I'm not sure how I feel about that either. as far as nature vs. nurture goes, I'm definitely on the nature side of things.

Perhaps, if we view gender (and therefore sexuality) not as the binary condition that our society expects and forces us into, but rather as a spectrum, then the inhabitants of Athos can be viewed as being much more open to the spectrum nature of their sexuality. Given that they have half of the spectrum removed (and don't even know it is missing) they are far more likely to be open to a wider range of possibilities, no? Some men (those on the far edge of extreme heterosexuality) will never find anyone they are attracted to, and they may react by embracing asexuality, or they may keep looking, or they may decide the problem is with them.

very interesting point, Alexa! food for thought.

Read this over the weekend and liked it. Good discussion points above. I look at Athos as another of Bujold-created societies, all of which have good and bad components. Beta may just be too free. Barrayer is a bit misogynist -- keep the women in the kitchen taking care of the kids as they certainly can't be in combat. Cetaganda is very weird -- talk about class status!

I do not think Bujold is saying that sexuality is 100% environmentally determined, just that environment can play a role society. This is no different than any culture-developed role. I see a relationship to the gender roles of males and females pointed out Lean In: Women, Work, and the Will to Lead, which has gained so much attention, weven though what it says is not new.