Monday, October 11, 2004

Is romance feminist writing?

Catherine Asaro did a short reading and then gave a fascinating talk. She talked about how science fiction asks questions about the future more than it predicts the future, whether or not she would choose immortality and, most controversially I think, how romance is really a feminist writing.

She pointed out that the communicators on Star Trek are nothing more than cell phones. Catherine said that science fiction presents a puzzle in the form of what if this happened? Then what would happen? And then sets out to solve the puzzle. Of course I think that all fiction is based on what if this happened? as well as what happened next?

She talked about how her own doctorate fits into her work and how she has learned to keep the essays explaining the hard science separate from the fiction. She talked about how people view her books as bringing romance into Science Fiction.

Before I go on I would like to say that in my own personal world Heinlein brought the romance into science fiction. What is I Will Fear No Evil if it is not a romance? Romance runs deep in much of Heinlein’s work. Her most interesting point didn’t have anything to do with who was the first.

Catherine said that romance is feminist fiction. At its core romance says that the feelings and emotional needs of women are validated and important. And that this genre says the same thing about men’s feelings and emotional needs so its really empowering to everyone. I love this idea. Romance is so often trivialized by the world and romance readers are still often viewed as fat middle aged housewives eating bonbons and reading trash. I much prefer Catherine’s perspective.

An audience member asked her what she would do if she were offered the chance at immortality. She said she would take it and said that in her line of work, theoretical physics, you could spend decades learning the basics and then the rest of your life keeping up with the cutting edge. We don’t really live long enough to get to do all the things we’d like to do and if we had forever it would take the pressure off of society and we could accomplish so much more.

This is particularly interesting because I have often heard the theory that the reason we get anything done at all is because we have such a short time to leave our mark. Our lifespan limits give us a built in deadline and that gives us motivation.

I could totally see Catherine’s idea though and how so many cultures could relax if we could live forever or for a very long time. Think of how much pressure certain groups put on children to excel, to become doctors or lawyers, to be the best. Perhaps it would be okay for those kids to go off to Europe for a year of backpacking if their parents knew there was plenty of time to do everything.

Then we really could settle on new planets. The possibilities are endless and amazing.

* * * *

My own writing - I did a little over eight pages today.

0 Comments:

Post a Comment

<< Home