TO READ FOR NEXT WEEK:
Time Considered as a Helix of Semi-Precious Stones by Samuel R. Delany
So I forgot yesterday (again) to put the post up. I Figure that's probably fine though since we're likely still recovering from the holidays. What better way to wrap them up than with some cheery Harlan Ellison?
DISCUSSION OF LAST WEEK'S READING:
Prompts for discussion
The Beast That Shouted Love at the Heart of the World: This seems to be one of Ellison's more experimental pieces. Ellison describes it:
- The title story, "The Beast That Etcetera", was intended as an experiment. Consciously so.
It is not a sequential story. It is written in a circular form, as though a number of events were taking place around the rim of a wheel, simultaneously. The simultaneity of events around that wheel-rim, however, occur across the artificial barriers of time, space dimension, and thought. Everything comes together, finally, in the center, at the hub of the wheel.
So hopefully that helps in deciphering it; it's the most convoluted piece of his that I've read yet. Then, at the center, we have a bit of a moral dilemma with Semph and Linah.
Any commentary from you guys?
And remember to vote for your favorites for next week
Ongoing list of material to vote on
Frankenstein
Forbidden Planet
The Day the Earth Stood Still
I, Robot (book)
Watchbird by Robert Sheckley
Equoid by Charles Stross
Shoutouts:
Trombone kleinbl00 JakobVirgil mhr OftenBen plewemt elizabeth blackbootz flagamuffin Meriadoc minimum_wage Tiger_the_Lion _thoracic johnnyFive tehstone rthomas6 War Dala OftenBen bhrgunatha kantos francopoli anatomygeek Purple_Ruby
One of the things I was thinking about, after reading it all, was that it seemed to be heavily reliant on symbolism, which is part of the reason it went over my head. That said, he used some really strong imagery, and it made me wonder how the story would have seemed if instead of being written, it was drawn out. Edit: That said, it'd probably be pretty startling in the depicted violence.
After reading that I kept wondering whether the dragon was really a maniac or insane. How cruel and how helpful was their definition of insane?
Bill and Semph are acting out of the same rough motivations. “I love everyone in the world. I do. So help me God, I love you, all of you!” = “Then you’ll forgive me, Linah, because I love my fellow man, too. Whenever he was, wherever he is; I have to, I work in an inhuman field, and I have to cling to that. So… you’ll forgive me…” Both are unleashing evil on others because of a sense of love for others (hence Bill's face and Semph's statue having the same expression). In Semph's case there seems to be a sane moral dilemma to be had from all this, but is there really? His work causes much more damage than Bill's actions. From a utilitarian perspective Semph is much worse than Bill, as is Linah. We automatically see them as the "sane" ones in this composition, but are they really? Please forgive my rough analysis, I'm recovering from a bad case of food poisoning and am very much out of it.