Sorry if I said you did. I'd meant to refer to Santesso's 2014 article "Fascism and Science Fiction" where he says she is (in form and structure). It's a bit of a trope… (like saying she's not anarchist, she's a Trotskyist)
-
-
good grief, that seems like a leap.
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
There's a long tradition of euphemizing anarchism as spiritualist, Romantic, quietist, or defeatist, etc. I'm fascinated by how Jameson will say "anarchism" then in the revised publication "quietistic" then "religious" & finally "anti-political."
1 reply 0 retweets 6 likes -
hah. I mean, I think criticizing Le Guin as quietist is sometimes reasonable, obviously, since I did that, butseems like a long leap from there to "fascist".
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @nberlat @GiffordJames and
How does “the ones who walk away from omelas” fit in here? Do you read quietism there?
1 reply 0 retweets 3 likes -
Replying to @cheerlessdrudge @GiffordJames and
you know, i either have not read it or have forgotten it! I need to read it I know...
1 reply 0 retweets 2 likes -
Replying to @nberlat @cheerlessdrudge and
I’ve got a whole study guide on it! Well, “Ones” (not “Those” that student use more often than not) suggests the individual as meaningful; the allusions in it to Dostoyevsky, James, & Arendt on power; & the contrasts among deontological, consequentialist, & virtue ethics.
1 reply 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @GiffordJames @nberlat and
Despite recognizing the evil some would commit to achieve a utopia, she shows the ones who leave rather than fight to impose their own new utopia. We don’t know where they’re going or what it will be, only that they’re not contributing to the banality of evil.
3 replies 0 retweets 6 likes -
Replying to @GiffordJames @cheerlessdrudge and
okay I just read it and OMG must Russ have *hated* that story. The Two of Them seems specifically like an outraged response to it!
3 replies 0 retweets 4 likes -
Replying to @nberlat @GiffordJames and
you don't walk away! you rescue the kid, if you can!
5 replies 0 retweets 4 likes
Well I mean I feel like people kind of read this story backwards Like if you want Omelas, a completely imaginary place, to exist without the kid, you can just stop reading before she makes it up She openly says this, it's all out on the table
-
-
Replying to @arthur_affect @nberlat and
She puts the kid in because otherwise Omelas isn't a real place, it's literally unimaginable It would be a pointless and unpublishable story, just someone masturbating over an impossibly idyllic paradise for no reason
2 replies 0 retweets 7 likes -
Replying to @arthur_affect @nberlat and
In the meta, literal sense, Omelas cannot exist without the kid That's its REASON for existing, it's where the story comes from No one ever tells stories about utopias except to expose their hidden flaw and falsity
2 replies 1 retweet 8 likes - Show replies
New conversation -
Loading seems to be taking a while.
Twitter may be over capacity or experiencing a momentary hiccup. Try again or visit Twitter Status for more information.