Jump to content

10/17/16 - Waning, ch. 4 (V*)


neongrey

Recommended Posts

*No violence occurs on the page, but the POV character is rather fixated on an act of violence.

Previously: Savae Alevrin, the human jeweler, archmage, and priest of the moons, is at best politely tolerated in the aelin city of Ilidria; at worst, the normally tightly-restrained people are openly hostile. Beholden to the crime lord Varael Ashana, they're tasked with obtaining a token from a senator so that he can work his dread magic. But they have their own tasks, and an object they need in order to perform one comes in the arms of a nervous adolescent girl calling herself Kathalania. After some coaxing, Kathalania blurts that she believe she's killed the city's own living goddess...

Since it's been a while since last chapter, some WRS notes: in chapter 3, Lasila encounters a priestess of Alia matching the description here, named Maranthe. Maranthe told Lasila that she holds the potential for a probably-illegal form of magic, and invited Lasila to celebrate the goddess' rebirth in a month's time.

I have some issues with this chapter but I was treading water on it for a long time and it accomplishes what I need done, so. Right now I'm not going to direct you at anything specific; I want to see what you come up with.

Thanks!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 minutes ago, Ernei said:

I know it's unpopular opinion, but I would check for bias against religion here. Neither Savae nor the priestess from the previous chapter look like a positive character, and by making all priests negative characters, you suggest that there's something wrong with priesthood and religion overall.

 

That is an entirely valid reading, and one that is not wholly unintended. This is a story about the exercise of power by the corrupt, about them using established power structures for the exploitation of others, and the exploitation of religion for political power. And about the agents of a blood goddess attempting to destabilize an empire.

Thanks on the rest, I'll make some notes!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thank you for the suggestion.

e: Actually, on second thought, no, I'm going to unpack this, because there's some severe misconceptions going on with this.

Quote

 It's similar to including woman that are more than just subjects to not be sexist.

1) What you're describing here is tokenism. Straight-up. Now, I'm of the school of thought that tokenism is better than literally nothing in terms of representation, but it is in no way a demonstration of lack of bias either in the text or in the author. In fact, it's a demonstration that the bias exists. If the reason you are including women is so that you don't appear sexist, that is an act of sexism. Is it the worst possible act of sexism in the world? Nah. But it's sexist, and learning to recognize when one takes such action is key to helping stop do them.

2) It is in no way similar. Let's talk about why, and the answer comes down to representation of marginalized groups. Priests, of any religion, real or fictional, are not a marginalized group. They're an opt-in group of people who typically have authority within their communities. This is literally the opposite of being marginalized. Women, people of colour, non-cisgendered people, non-heterosexual people, all of these people are marginalized in real life and in fiction; they are frequently subjected to violence on this basis, they are frequently singled out for violence in fiction on this basis, if they are included at all, and they are subject to both social and political restrictions within many societies in both real life and in fiction. Having a main character be a priest who is a violent revolutionary attempting to destabilize the empire that colonized and subjugated their people is not the same as, for example, portraying all women in one's work as shrieking harpies. It is not even the position of the author that this is a negative depiction at all.

An analogy is only appropriate if it takes into account the implications surrounding both sides of the analogy, and in this case it very much does not.

Edited by neongrey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

The beginning of this chapter is excellent.  Thalan/Kathalania is also a great character (though I completely forgot about Savae running into them due to WRS), and this gives a lot more insight to what Savae is doing.  

I'll agree with Ernei that the clothes and make-up descriptions are too long, but I've harped on that before.

I like that you've brought forward a lot of the political intrigue so we will have a better knowledge further along in the story.  However, I'm still a bit confused by the what the proper religious process is, and why this is bad.  The goddess dies and is reborn.  Here she's been killed and will be reborn.  I'm sure there's some other motive, but I don't know what it is at this point.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'll say this because I feel like it should be said. You're allowed to ignore or disregard advice as you see fit, but Ernei has made a reasoned and logical argument as part of her critique. You can ignore that or engage in it, but to respond in such a manner as you've chosen seems to be a major overreaction. The problem with handling a critique in the manner that you have is that you put off others from coming forward with their whole opinion or any opinion. This isn't doing you a service; quite the opposite.

If Ernei had said something absolutely egregious I would understand, but that just isn't the case(Unless she has edited out some offensive language that I'm just not seeing here). Censoring your own critiques isn't going to help you improve as a writer or a person. We all have improvements to make. I'm not suggesting that she's right or wrong, but that the way you handled her critique was in error.

Just my two cents.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

My request, and subsequent blocklisting, is neither censorship nor about the suggestion. I do not feel comfortable with this person reviewing my work. Your two cents will not make me more comfortable with this person, nor will it make me feel comfortable having them associated with my work in any capacity. I do not want this person's input upon my work.

Edited by neongrey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Ernei said:

People who talk a lot about sexism, homophobia etc. often don't want to recognize it, but priest are also marginalized.

Can you help me understand your statement better, @Ernei? Are you referring to priests as in, priests of Christianity, or say, voodoo priests? There's a really big difference here, in that you are comparing marginalized groups that have been burned at the stake, killed for being raped, killed for simply existing, and most recently, bombed in a nightclub, to the leaders of a mainstream religion who traditionally have enjoyed a place of power and privilege, even when 'converting' native communities. BUT I could be making an assumption. Certainly voodoo priests would fall under a marginalized status, as well as wiccan leaders, etc. Druid priests... that might be a mixed bag. I'd like to better understand your statement because at it reads, it appears to come from a position of privilege and perhaps misunderstanding. If that is the case, perhaps we could work through that misunderstanding together (and learn a bit about each other in the process).

7 hours ago, Ernei said:

Women - because this is the analogy I used - aren't in fact marginalized, not anymore

This may be a country thing. You are not living currently in the USA, is that correct? I know that equality between the binary sexes is different even within western countries, and certainly quite different in other areas. It is best to avoid sweeping generalizations like this, because women are still quite marginalized across the world (honor killings, education, etc) and even here, in the USA (I say 'here' because I think the site is US hosted?). I used to live in Canada, so I know things are a lot different there. The marginalization is certainly less overt than it was say, fifty years ago, but it does still exist. Some recent examples from the recent past of my own life as a nonbinary scientist in a traditionally and currently white, cis, hetero, male dominated field:

- female undergraduate comes to my office in tears because she asked her professor for a letter of recommendation for a job application and he told her no, because he doesn't believe women should work outside the home

- at our department's accreditation review, a reviewer pointed to me and called me the department's checkbox. To my face. In front of my colleagues, who laughed and said nothing

- A male professor told a female advisor that her masters degree didn't mean anything and that anyone could get one because it wasn't in a science

We've made a lot of strides, certainly, in equality, and likely even in the USA in some fields there is not much or any, gap. It is important, however, to note that a gap does exist, because we do not want to be the ones to further marginalize someone. 

 

So I'd love to chat more about this if you'd like to. @neongrey hopefully won't mind us hijacking their thread. Dialogue about this is really good, and I hope others join in as well. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

This sort of thing is everywhere. We live in a world where one of the most prosperous countries in the world has a leading political candidate who states that he would "grab [women] by the pussy". Where in articles about women who are experts in their field, there is in inevitable focus on their appearance, on their home life. Where actors are asked to discuss their roles; actresses are asked to discuss losing weight. Where making the leading character in a franchise entry in a majour film series a woman creates widespread outcry. Where people with female-sounding names on applications are categorically subjected to different treatment in how those applications are handled. Where women receive less pay than men for the same work. Women are harrassed on streets and told they are supposed to appreciate it.

This sort of thing is pervasive.

It's absolutely possible to go through life if you have a certain level of privelege to not realize the myriad ways, subtle and otherwise, that sexism can play a role in one's life. But the fact is, 'I don't experience it, therefore it's not a problem for anyone' is a highly myopic sentiment.

Quote

 I used to live in Canada, so I know things are a lot different there. 

I mean, different in a lot of ways here, but a lot of stuff is absolutely the same. It seems like every few months we've got news coming up about yet another judge saying a woman was 'asking for it', street harrassment is still a huge problem (but that, I think, is worldwide), etc, etc.

We're better at some things, but, man, I wish Canada was the wonderful fairyland people wished it was.

Edited by neongrey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, neongrey said:

I wish Canada was the wonderful fairyland people wished it was.

Well I mean, Canada has healthcare and better equality all around and hockey, but the USA has better Netflix and Amazon Prime and the best roller derby teams. Telecommunications is also kind of a racket in Canada. Those things aside, I consider it a pretty magical place. Canada also has the TV show Lost Girl. If that wasn't a magical fairy ride of a show I don't know what is (ignoring a few of the last seasons).

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I coulda killed netflix when they started cracking down on VPNs this year.

But yeah, we do a lot of things better, just, you know, sometimes you hear things like 'there's no racism in canada', and I'm just, buddy, let me tell you about the residential school system...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

- I like the description of how Thalan wakes up - as well as the initial confusion about his - yes his - gender.

- I also like his initial meeting with Savae.

- I also like the intrigue about the goddess' murder.

- Generally, I like this segment. The only problem is . . . not much happens. There's a couple detail on the murder, but that's it. It feels like it needs a little more, but for what it is so far, it is good. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm glad that it's not obfuscatory; genderfluidity can be a little tricky to follow in text since you generally want consistent referents for a character (and one expects a change to be permanent) but I think this'll work well for maintaining clarity. I'm kind of cribbing from Robin Hobb in terms of how I'm dealing with Kathalania/Thalan. Regrettably, it seems there's no more elegant way to talk about the character external to the text without using s/he, because either could be applicable at any given moment, and they never is, but, well. That's English for you!

And yeah, I'm really not in love with this chapter. There's stuff in it I really like a lot, but I feel like right now the following actions shouldn't be in the same chapter, and can be reshuffled later if need be, but I've got concerns about the second conversation being too expository, and lacking general substance. So far it seems like the exposition isn't a huge issue here, but the lack of substance might well be.

Edited by neongrey
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 hours ago, Ernei said:

It turned into quite an essay, but I hope I properly explained my position without offending anyone. If my choice of words was poor somewhere, please let me know - I'm not very familiar with, and often confused by, proper terms. For instance, I get that saying that someone is "black" is bad, but apparently saying that someone is "white" is OK?

@Ernei

So I think what we're hitting here is a cultural difference along with some 'lost-in-translation' bits. I will try to explain. 

The issue isn't so much arguing about whether or not religious leaders experience hate. Certainly every group will experience hate at some point in history. Marginalization deals specifically with historically underrepresented groups, of which women, queer people, people of color, all belong. Religious leaders do not fall into this group because they were not historically marginalized as a group. Some specific groups could claim more than others, but as a group, generally, religious leaders lived relatively well. Not across the board, and it did depend on which religion, but they were not categorically marginalized as an entire group. 

@neongrey (and feel free to correct me, as I am putting words in your mouth) reacted because you were comparing a marginalized group to a non marginalized group. In Poland, marginalized groups may differ (and since I don't know your country's history, it may be that religious leaders there are truly a marginalized group), but in the USA and Canada, saying that group A, who was historically marginalized and is still marginalized is the same as group B, who has experienced hate but not on a large scale, and not routinely, is, well, it further marginalizes and it can come off quite offensive. 

This can perhaps be further illustrated by your black versus white comment above. In the USA at least, 'black' is not currently considered an offensive term, nor is 'white'. But let's pretend that for a moment, using the word 'black' to refer to a group of people is offensive. When white people decry this sort of thing as 'unfair', they are speaking from a place of privilege. They feel discriminated against when in fact, all that is happening is that black people are trying to claim their fair space, their seat at the table as it were. As black people are a currently and historically marginalized group, their attempts to frame the conversation in a way that finally showcases them in a positive and more equal light can sometimes seem unfair. Things can seem unfair when you are in a position of privilege.

A fantastic example below, not mine, and paraphrased:

Sally and Johnny are playing with toys. Johnny has four toys, Sally has one. An adult comes by and gives Sally one more toy. Johnny cries that this is unfair, that he too deserves another toy because Sally got one. <-- often times attempts to balance the scales can seem like discrimination or generally unfairness if you are Johnny, who is used to having more. Now let's take this example and put in the priest scenario. The priests are Johnny, and the women are Sally. Maybe both got sand thrown in their face by a bully, but Johnny comes from a place of privilege and can recover faster. He has access to resources and more toys. He can bounce back. Sally is marginalized, has fewer safety nets and will not fare as well.

To say that Johnny and Sally's situations are equal because both got sand thrown in their face is very hurtful to the Sallys of the world. Understanding marginalization and how it affects groups of people is difficult, especially when it is marginalization in another culture. In the tiff above, the issue was not so much your desire to have religious leaders showcased in a positive light. Making suggestions on other's works is what critique is all about. The issue was that you then tried to tie the plight of religious leaders to that of women--you tried to say that Johnny and Sally were the same, when they are not. 

For those of us who are parts of marginalized groups, this is very hurtful. @neongrey responded in a very mature way in her choice to not engage. She was hurt and knew that if she tried to respond she would say nonconstructive, hurtful things. She chose instead to step away from the conversation. I was also hurt by the comparison, but I want to thank you for taking the time to explain your point of view to me. I can see that this is very much a cultural difference and a language barrier issue, and I hope that my writing above has helped to explain where neon and I are coming from in terms of how we felt about your statement. (You may also want to note that the word 'feminist' actually just means a person who believes in equality between men and women. Nothing more. In this definition, I would hope everyone on this board is a feminist.)

 

If I just sounded weird above, apologies. With the help of a librarian friend we have collected some links for reading that may better help you understand at least the North American issues related to marginalization, specifically female marginalization. I think this conversation has been very productive, and I want to thank you for taking the time to explain your point of view to me!

 

On modern sexism (most of these have studies involved, so actual science)

Gender and media

Gender and corporate jobs and general workplace

Women and speaking

gender bias in literature from Australia (it's not just a North American thing)

global issue of women in the workplace

list of international links

graphs!

in scientific studies/drug trials

creativity (and how women are just as sexist against women as men are)

 

On marginalization in general or topics other than sexism

for race, in fiction (we aren't talking about racism at all, but I could go on forever with links about racism and homophobia)

general underrepresentation of marginalized groups in literature

Link to comment
Share on other sites

7 hours ago, Ernei said:

About the priests in Poland - I don't know if you would call it marginalization, but they were heavily oppressed by the government during the communistic reign, which lasted until 1989 (though we are still cleaning up the mess!). They were forcefully enrolled in the army, arrested, then often tortured and killed. Even the Primate of Poland (which is as high as you can get in the Church's hierarchy without moving to Vatican) was arrested, although they released him eventually.

Thanks for sharing!  This is a really interesting piece of history I think a lot of Americans and Canadians are unaware of.  Just goes to show that there are cultural conflicts all over the world and it's better to see the whole picture.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Finally getting to this!

Overall

I can't really get a feel for Thalan. I feel like I need more of a character introduction. Savae seem more 'evil' in this one, if you could call it that, although perhaps they are merely more comfortable with someone gender fluid than gender binary. I like the sudden occurrence of plot for sure, but even with it, the conversation seems to drag. I can't put my finger on why though. It just seems like, for all the information being presented, the wording was too thick. I had to reread several times to catch everything.

Murder of the goddess though- woo!

As I go

He? Yes, he today <-- love

- the second paragraph is redundant and disrupts the flow. Recommend cutting

- the conversation between Thalan and the priest confuses me

- page two, this line is redundant and could be cut: He doesn't need to be laughed at. He lands his foot on the lower step, skirt swaying around his calves.

page three: what ho? Plot? All of a sudden? Loving it

- page three: even with the awesome information, this conversation drags

- ending is more solid than the beginning

Link to comment
Share on other sites

On 10/20/2016 at 11:05 AM, Ernei said:

About the priests in Poland - I don't know if you would call it marginalization, but they were heavily oppressed by the government during the communistic reign, which lasted until 1989 (though we are still cleaning up the mess!). They were forcefully enrolled in the army, arrested, then often tortured and killed. Even the Primate of Poland (which is as high as you can get in the Church's hierarchy without moving to Vatican) was arrested, although they released him eventually.

This is a very interesting piece of Polish history. Thank you for sharing! I know that religions were taboo under communist rule, but you don't hear too much about how that played out in practice. In this context it makes your comments very clear, and I can see how you would have drawn parallels to marginalized groups. I think this has been a really great discussion, and highlights that there are still so many differences between western countries. Not every country, for example, has the extreme history of slavery that the USA has, so we have unique issues facing us with that level of marginalization that other countries just don't face (to the same level). So thank you, again, for sharing this information!

On 10/20/2016 at 11:05 AM, Ernei said:

I believe that nobody should be evaluated in the context of their gender, race, orientation etc.

A bit more on this. As we have established, Polish mores on this area are likely quite different. I do want to discuss this a little, not so much for you, @Ernei, but for those in the USA who might have a similar thought. Minorities have been very vocal as of late (well really, throughout history, but social media is really helping to amplify) about this idea of 'colorblindness', 'gender blindness', etc. I will not attempt to speak for ethnic minorities, as I am not one, but I have read quite a bit about not wanting this blindness, about wanting to be seen, and have differences acknowledged. I am sure this has many nuances, and quite possibly does not translate to other countries, but that is the current dialogue of the USA. As a white person, I am trying to remember this, and be respectful, and to allow these minorities to frame the conversation they want to have.

On 10/20/2016 at 11:05 AM, Ernei said:

in the example with the words "black" and "white", I see it that you either give Sally more toys than Johnny has, or that you take for him to give her so that he still has less.

I guess I am still a little confused here, because neither of these words are problematic in the USA. Are they in Poland? It sounds sort of like  you're trying to address the concept of what we call 'affirmative action' here, wherein if, say, Sally and Johnny both applied for the same job, with equal qualifications and background (not necessarily the same, mind, but equal), Sally would be hired before Johnny (assuming we're talking about a field with underrepresented female population). In instances like these, it can very much seem like people are trying to tip the scales in favor of Sally at Johnny's expense. I don't know if I can adequately explain this process, as it involves concepts of privilege that might not translate well due to cultural differences, so I've pulled some links instead. Sometimes it can seem like one is giving more toys to Sally, but often times people don't realize that even if they gave a truckload of toys to Sally, she would never catch up to Johnny because Johnny benefits from privilege. Maybe the links below will help. 

Facts vs. Myths on affirmative action

A very important comic on privilege

On black versus white and privilege

Basically here in the States, especially when it comes to ethnicity, institutional racism and white privilege mean that the scales are still tipped in a white person's favor. As a society we try to fix that with things like affirmative action, diversity hiring, etc. Looking in from the outside, from another country, I can certainly see why it might look like minorities are being 'handed' something at the expense of other people, who are not, as individuals, necessarily the root cause. So the bigger pictures of institutional racism and privilege are often ignored, but are key players for us in the USA. @Ernei I would love to hear your thoughts on how this all works in Poland, because I know very little about that country and would be happy to learn more.

On 10/20/2016 at 11:05 AM, Ernei said:

I also have feelings.

And it's great that you voiced them! We're sort of a melting pot of cultures in here, and its good to know the background of other cultures so we can all coexist. In this particular instance, as I know @neongrey, their response was the better of the two options. They really were trying to spare your feelings by pulling back from the conversation. We could get into a long and involved discussion about how minority groups in the USA are tired of having to defend their positions, but this post is long-winded enough and I think we've already well established that we all need to be better cultural listeners. I don't regret any of this happening, however, because I got to understand a new culture, and learn some things, and I think that is a gift.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Savae definitely should come off more off-kilter outside of their own head, so I'm okay with that much at least. They're not "crazy" (ugh) but their answer to a broken system is to tear it down and build something new, and a) we haven't gotten to the 'build something new' part and b ) they're mostly talking with people who're so used to the system it doesn't occur that it would be possible or beneficial to do so. They're not exactly scrupulous, but they don't exactly have room for scruples in their position. It is the author's position that they are the closest thing this work has to a hero, for what that is worth (and what it's worth is basically that and nothing more; authorial intent is really only good for telling you what the author intended, and that's the boring part). Not that that's necessarily obvious at this point in time, or that everyone will necessarily agree with that, but, well.

That first conversation is definitely supposed to be odd and almost non-sequitorial but if it's outright confusing I can probably smoothe the edges.

The second conversation dragging, though, is one of the things I was pretty concerned about as I was going over it. I'll glare it into submission.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hello neyongrey!  I'm pretty late to this one, but here are my notes:

Overall I liked this chapter.  It seems like you usually get into the swing of plot-things later in your chapters, but in this case I actually didn't mind the getting ready scene.  I think the makeup is an interesting window into their culture. Sure, it could be streamlined, but overall it kept my attention.  The one suggestion I'll make about the beginning is that you give us maybe one or two more hints that this is the same person who killed the goddess.  I think you expressed Thalan as gender binary really well and clearly, as others have pointed out, but I just didn't know for sure that s/he was the same person that came in to Savae at the end of the last chapter until he literally said, "I killed a goddess."  It's partly WRS, since I forgot his/her female name, but maybe a mention of the black head covering when you mention his clothes on the chair, or having him remember coming into the jewelry shop, would help it click more quickly for your denser readers. :) As it was, I read the first scene feeling like I was missing something (which I was).

I found Savae's and Thalan's conversation over tea a tad confusing - I had to read over it twice.  I think they are making faster mental jumps than I am.

Otherwise I'm very interested how this is going to play out!  I was especially surprised that Savae has such big plans, since they seem to have very few resources, physical or social, in this culture, and I'm interested how they're going to pull it off.

(As a side note, just wanted to point out/confess my gender bias at work - I just had to correct all my pronouns for Savae from "he" to "they."  Surprise surprise, my brain picked a binary gender, and it chose the culturally dominant gender instead of my own...)

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...