The Sword and Laser discussion

Did anyone find that the Freudian psychobabble in the (view spoiler)[therapy sessions (hide spoiler)] didn't really age well? This seems to be very common in science fiction novels of the 50s and 60s, and though this novel was written in the 70s, it's still a predominant factor in the story.

It kinda drove me crazy (pun intended), though I still enjoyed the book.

While I found the concept of the (view spoiler)[AI therapist (hide spoiler)]very interesting, the actual dialogue in the (view spoiler)[therapy sessions themselves (hide spoiler)] seemed fairly idiotic by modern standards.

Did anyone else have this reaction?

Yeah, it took me even further back than the book. That is, I saw it as representative of more like the 50s than the 70s. I can understand it as a framing device, but didn't really enjoy it.

FWIW I found this book to be like one of the many forgettable SF books I read as a young'un, 200 pages of some worthwhile but not great premise, read quickly and on to the next. I don't understand the many awards.

I would have to disagree on that. In my opinion, this can't be compared to what was usually done in the 50's. The exchanges between the hero and the robotic psychiatrist are meaningful, and help build Rob's persona - mixing funny and dramatic moments.

In the 50's I'd expect this to be nothing more than a backdrop to the story - authors would likely move to the present tense and ignore the fact that what was being said was actually within a therapy session.

Anyway, I'm about 20% in, and I feel the "therapy discussion thing" quite refreshing.In this sense, it reminds me of "The Sparrow", which we've previously read.

Edit: I must agree with John, Buff, and Lauren. Although it starts fresh and interesting, later on in the book it moves from there to "too much pcychobabble"

I'm about 80% done with the book, and while I was okay with the psychobabble for most of the book, there's a revelation in a late therapy session that is super weird to me. (view spoiler)[It's the one about his mother and the thermometer. (hide spoiler)] This one just felt really dated, and combined with the overt (view spoiler)[casual homophobia (hide spoiler)] exhibited throughout the book and in previous discussions, I really felt like I was reading a relic, and I was so disgusted that I nearly put this book down.

Curious if anyone else got pinged out by this.

Lauren wrote: "I'm about 80% done with the book, and while I was okay with the psychobabble for most of the book, there's a revelation in a late therapy session that is super weird to me. [spoilers removed] This ..."

Agreed Lauren, that one was a bit weird. It seemed so out of place with the rest of the story.

---

My biggest issue with the psych scenes is that it kind of telegraphs part of the ending. (view spoiler)[You know he's rich and you know he's suffering from some sort of major loss. (hide spoiler)]

I found this stuff to be very true to the era, which just underscores how dated it all is. All the talk of horoscopes is straight out of that time -- "What's your Sign?" was a legitimate icebreaker back then -- as were references to things like Est, which were as faddish as pet rocks.

Sigfrid reminds me of the ELIZA simulation program which I first encountered in the late 80s, which has been around since the 60s.

But much more advanced.

There are many versions still around. Like this one

http://psych.fullerton.edu/mbirnbaum/...

Trike wrote: "as were references to things like Est, which were as faddish as pet rocks. "

They use Est in "The Americans" TV show. I didn't realise it was a real thing in the 80s.
I also found the horoscope talk dated. Thankfully belief in that shit has faded since the book was written.

The pyschotherapy and astrology definitely aged this one. It was OK but I liked the premise much more than the book itself.

So far, the therapy sessions are entertaining for me, trying to figure out what happened to make him suppress and deflect so much. The narrator in the audiobook is keeping me engaged.

When I first saw this thread, I was just over half-way through and thought it wasn't too bad. The Freudian crap was there for sure, but it didn't detract from the book.

Now that I'm done, yeah. It was very distracting.

Trike wrote: "as were references to things like Est, which were as faddish as pet rocks. "

I had no idea what Est was, and so I think I missed these references, but I looked it up and holy cats what a weird program.

There's an article that covers the basics of it here: http://articles.latimes.com/2010/nov/...

"est training lasted 60-plus hours over two consecutive weekends, and the sessions were led by authoritarian instructors whose mission, Psychology Today reported in 1975, was to "tear you down and put you back together." As a result, a strict set of rules was enforced. A single day's training, for instance, could last 15 hours with just two breaks. With up to 250 participants attending the seminars at one time, est looked to some media watchers like a form of mass mind control."

I enjoyed the therapy framework during the beginning of the book, but by the end just found it totally repetitive. Overall I was pretty disappointed with the Freudian elements. They felt very dated and brought the book as a whole way down for me...

Also re: Lauren's comment: (view spoiler)[The totally weird way the author dealt with characters' sexualities definitely did not sit well with me. It was nice to see bisexual characters, but it felt like they were devices used to point out how repressed Robinette was. It seemed like Pohl was pushing the idea that Robinette was a "latent homosexual" (using this specifically because it's a Freudian term), but I'm not familiar enough with Freudian theory to analyze further. And it did all feel vaguely homophobic in the end. (hide spoiler)]

Lauren wrote: "Trike wrote: "as were references to things like Est, which were as faddish as pet rocks. "

I had no idea what Est was, and so I think I missed these references, but I looked it up and holy cats wh..."

If you want to see a great satire of Est, watch the Burt Reynolds movie Semi-Tough, which came out the same year as Gateway. The organization there is called BEAT and it accurately portrays the looniness of Est.

These people were all over the place back then. It's hard to convey how crazy the 1970s were to people who didn't experience it. Frankly, I'm surprised that Pohl didn't include Pyramid Power alongside his Chariots of the Gods-esque Heechee.

Even better, read The Serial: A Year in the Life of Marin County which is over the top satire... and dead on as to what the 70s were like.

^ Is that the source for the movie Serial? That was among the funniest movies I have ever seen.

Yes, it is. The book's hilarious, or was when I read it initially.

Tassie Dave wrote: "Sigfrid reminds me of the ELIZA simulation program which I first encountered in the late 80s, which has been around since the 60s."

This was the first thought I had about it, too.

I didn't find the horoscope reference dating. There are three Psychics with store fronts offering Horoscope/Tarot/Aura readings within walking distance of my loft. My boss at a previous gig needed to know all of our birthdates so she would know how to manage us. She would run ALL major company decisions by her personal Mystic; we literally could not make binding decisions in meetings. Astrology is still a thing for many people.

(view spoiler)[I'm confused by the homophobic accusations, I'm not saying Rob isn't homophobic, but clearly the society isn't (they keep putting explicitly gay crews together), Sigfrid von Shrink isn't (he keeps assuring Rob that his sexuality is normal). I can't think of anybody in the book OTHER than Rob who acts even vaguely homophobic.

I'm not gay, so I'm quite willing to admit I might be insensitively missing something.

I think this is another reason you are supposed to dislike him. In a society that has mostly moved past homophobia, Rob is an atavism. (hide spoiler)]

terpkristin wrote: "Tassie Dave wrote: "Sigfrid reminds me of the ELIZA simulation program which I first encountered in the late 80s, which has been around since the 60s."

This was the first thought I had about it, too."

I thought the same thing.

Robert wrote: "I didn't find the horoscope reference dating. There are three Psychics with store fronts offering Horoscope/Tarot/Aura readings within walking distance of my loft. My boss at a previous gig needed ..."

That stuff's hooey! You gotta have a screw loose to go in for that sort of thing.

https://youtu.be/r0I80hWOFS8

Trike wrote: "That stuff's hooey! You gotta have a screw loose to go in for that sort of thing."

That definitely describes my former boss :-)

Robert wrote: I'm confused by the homophobic accusations, I'm not saying Rob isn't homophobic, but clearly the society isn't. ..

I agree. As a member of the LGBT community I'm usually on the lookout for that kind of thing - or at least with older works to guard myself from being offended by it - but I actually found that the society's perceptions were very modern. Everyone on Gateway seems to regard sex in a casual, almost progressive way, which makes Robert's internalized homophobia stand out all the more. That being said, it all seemed really unnecessary to the story line.

On the psychobabble:
It irritated me throughout the novel. We all know Freudian Theory is bs so having that thrown at me, with increasing extremity, every five pages was kind of painful.

I'm finally mostly through this book, and I gotta say, the "Freudian psychobabble" doesn't bother me because it's "Freudian psychobabble" as much as those parts of the story are the parts I just don't care about. I realize that they were part of Phol's vision, they just distract me from the parts I'm interested in.