Reader's Department: BRASS TACKS
Dear Stan,
Thank you for your piece, “Signs of Respect,” in the June issue. You touch on a subject that has interested me for a long, long time.
When I was in primary school, more years ago than I care to remember, I attended a small school (twenty kids) in the middle of a feudal estate in South-western England. From time to time, as I made my way along footpaths in the forest, to and from school, a member of the land-owning gentry would pass me, coming or going. I always did what we children were told to do, and tugged a forelock as the individual passed me. Later, when I noted that grown-ups did not follow the forelock rule, I concluded that it was designed to show not respect, but subservience. I did not like it, but I still obeyed the “phantom tyrant."
Later still, when I knew a bit of history, I concluded that the Magna Carta (1215) was all about forelocks. The barons of that time hated having to show, by that or some other similar motion, their subservience to the king, so they rebelled and reduced the king to a lower level of dominance.
I used to muse on the fact that it took over seven hundred years for the principle to go from general to minimal use.
King and country needed me in the Army in 1944. I learned about saluting, and concluded that it was nothing but the forelock thing all over again, a reminder of my own subservient status. I never did think of it as a mark of respect.
At that time, I began thinking about culture and the organization of society; that is, about the phantom tyrants. I don't know how long it took me to arrive at this conclusion, but I concluded that culture was what people did without thinking about it, and its development was helpful to persons in authority—it made the behavior of subservient persons predictable.
Probably a good deal later, I thought about silverback gorillas, about elephant matriarchs, and alpha male wolves. Humans, I thought, probably also need dominant leaders to survive. Likely, that has gone on for so many generations that evolution has implanted it in our genes.
Another long time ago, when I was still quite young, I read Arnold Toynbee's model of human affairs, presented in his Study of History. Toynbee, you may recall, reckoned that societies facing serious challenges to their survival develop creative minorities who resolve their problems. Later, with the problems resolved, societies succumb to the authority of dominant minorities, non-problem-solvers with a vested interest in maintaining status quos. This works well enough, until a new set of challenges develops, whereupon the dominants, unable to cope, go to war, becoming more tyrannical along the way. War destroys the society, whether it be tribe, nation, empire, or civilization, but creatives re-emerge, and we start all over again.
Well, that is a gross over-simplification of a twelve-volume work, but it is, perhaps, enough to be relevant. With Toynbee in mind, I let my thoughts regress to hunter-gatherer times. Creatives, over thousand of generations, must have observed the migrations of game, the succulence and timing of edible fruit and plants, and must have established myths—cultures—that enabled dominants to take over and exercise their tyranny. Evolution probably did the rest. Once again I concluded that our human actions, such as males taking off their hats indoors, are most likely genetically based, enforcing conformity on the lower classes, and creating obedience to the dominants. For as long as humans existed, these were life and death matters. Our subjection to phantom tyrants must go very deep within all of us.
Dominants, of course, indulge in ever-harsher measures to enforce their tyranny. We, in our time (and place) enjoy an exceptional measure of freedom. But it does seem to me that after the creative decades following WW II, the dominants, here and elsewhere, have been gaining. Recently, inspired by the war in Iraq, I wrote a poem—actually a ghazal—in which a desert hermit reminds a passing camel-borne aristocrat of the two problems that humanity must always confront. The first is that of those in authority—how to control the People. The second is that of the People—how to control those in authority. Unfortunately, modern IT and communications technology vastly increase the power of those in authority. That is something to think about, every time you find yourself taking off your hat, as you go indoors.
Thanks again. Best wishes, and apologies for running on and on.
Brian C. Coad.
* * * *
Dear Doctor Schmidt,
Your editorial about the all-too-common modern fantasy of achieving absolute safety was one of those, which, in my more romantic moments, I dream might someday not need saying at all.
I half-expected you to bring up an obvious counter-example to this kind of unthinking hysteria; since you didn't, allow me to do so.
I wonder (in both senses of the term) why it is that we don't also see editorials and political campaigns aimed at real-life dangers that in fact take many, many more human lives every year than have Canada geese over the entire history of powered flight. If the Post were really concerned about the safety of its readers, surely it will publish many editorials demanding that cars be limited to speeds of no more than 20 kilometers per hour, if not that the private automobile be banned altogether.
On an entirely unrelated note, if Don Sakers’ first column is anything to go by (and why wouldn't it be?), you have found an excellent replacement for Tom Easton as your resident book reviewer.
Sincerely,
Geoffrey Dow
* * * *
Dear Dr. Schmidt:
Your editorial about the NY Post screaming for blood after geese disabled the USAIR jet, forcing its heroically successful, controlled crash landing in the Hudson River, grabbed me hard in two respects. First, thank you for once again pointing out the folly of tendering perfect safety as public policy. In addition to the impossibility of the goal and wastefulness of its pursuit, I believe you have pointed out elsewhere the danger of diverting public emphasis from the kind of self-reliance on which the possibility of persistence as a free people depends. Such ad hoc rationales as the preciousness of every single human life over ALL alternatives are fallbacks in arguments for many popular causes, from the right to bear arms to music in the public schools and the right to go to college. We need a better rationale. May we find one soon. Second, I am just exasperated enough with the ubiquitous public nuisance afforded by Canada geese where I live (northern Ohio), yet mindful of the fact that not many decades ago we had NONE, that I would love to see a national goose harvesting program go into effect as soon and enthusiastically as possible. “Stamp out hunger: eat a goose today!” If even one child can be saved from malnutrition...
Joseph E. Quittner
Cleveland Heights, OH
* * * *
Stan,
Your September editorial ("Where Credit is Due") really struck home with me, especially your schools and your teachers. I was born and raised in the little (1,400 people then) historic town (you can Google it for its history) of New Harmony, Indiana. The school was just one building: eight rooms for the 1st through 8th grades, and in the high school area: a language room (English and Latin; I took four years of Latin!), a math room (including advanced algebra and solid geometry), a history and social studies room, and a large assembly room where we each had a desk assigned.
As I have realized in later years, what was really amazing was the teaching staff. I had almost every discipline, they were very knowledgeable in their subjects, and great motivators. For many years, I've had a local artist's picture of the school hanging in my bedroom, and every time I glance at it, I'm reminded again of how fortunate I was to have my early schooling there. In subsequent years, I acquired a BS in Chemistry, an MS in Analytical Chemistry, and an MS in Operations Research, but never had any more talented teachers than the ones I started out with.
Thanks for motivating me to write to you about them.
Jack E. Garrett
* * * *
Dear Dr. Schmidt,
I must disagree with your response to the September letter from John Jarrell in Brass Tacks. You fault him for having a political bias. I certainly do have one, and I would presume that you do also. If you should choose not to print a letter with a political bias, I could easily understand that, but having printed it, and then faulting him for it seems suspect.
Am I defending his viewpoint? Absolutely, since I have been saying exactly the same things for quite a while now. And I am sure that somewhere in here I have a spelling error or two, but does his error somehow lessen the point he was making?
The first thing I read in Analog is your editorial, and it sometimes worries me that I agree with you 98% of the time, and am one of your fans for that alone, aside from the excellent magazine. But I honestly believe that in this response, you blew it big time.
Don Manyette
* * * *
No, I did not fault him for having a political bias, nor do I consider my response a personal attack (as at least one other reader claimed). I explicitly acknowledged that his general points were good ones, which was the main reason I printed the letter. What bothered me was that all his specific illustrations seemed to be chosen to expound a particular political bias, to the point where it seemed that that, not promoting more careful thought, was the primary purpose of the letter. I may have been mistaken in that impression, but it's the one I got, and I got it strongly. And that would have bothered me regardless of which political bias he showed.
* * * *
Clan Father (I mean Dr. Schmidt),
I was so intrigued by the first half of Barry Longyear's “Turning The Grain” that the minute the September issue arrived, I sat down and finished it.
That was a great story, full of interesting Native American mythology, an imaginative description of early humans, very earthy details, touching relationships, and a happy ending that I didn't quite expect. When I finished reading it, my spirits were raised.
Time travel is a very old theme in science fiction, and could be overworked, but “Time Spanning” as Barry did it was fresh and exciting. Donald Moffit's use of parallel universes for time travel in “The Affair of The Phlegmish Master” (June, 2008) was equally clever.
Analog is without doubt, the very best.
Give my birthday regards to Otto Schmidt. He is my senior by four years.
Bob Stanton
Reader's Department: UPCOMING EVENTS by Anthony Lewis
4-6 December 2009
SMOFCON 27 (Convention runners convention) at Hilton Garden Inn Downtown, Austin, TX. Theme: Time Management. Membership: $60 until 1 November 2009, more thereafter. Info: www.alamo-sf.org/smofcon27/; P.O. Box 27277, Austin, TX 78755-2277
15-18 January 2010
ARISIA ‘10 (New England SF conference) at Hyatt Regency Hotel, Cambridge, MA. Artist Guest of Honor: Sarah Clemens; Fan Guests of Honor: Kevin Roche & Andy Trembley; Musical Guest of Honor: SJ Tucker (Skinny White Chick); Writer/Editor Guest of Honor: Gardner Dozois. Memberships: $40 until 30 September 2009. Info: www.arisia.org; info@ arisia.org; Box 391596, Cambridge, MA 02139.
Late January 2010
VERICON X (Harvard University SF conference) at Harvard Yard, Harvard, Cambridge, MA. Info: Harvard-Radcliffe Science Fiction Association, Student Organizations Center, 59 Shepard St., Box 93, Harvard University, Cambridge, MA 02138
12-14 February 2010
BOSKONE 47 (New England SF conference) at Waterfront Westin, Boston, MA. Guest of Honor: Alastair Reynolds; Official Artist: John Picacio; Special Guest: Tom Shippey; Featured Filker: Mary Crowell; Hal Clement Science Speaker: Vernor Vinge; NESFA Press Guest: Michael Whelan. Membership: $47 until Mid-January 2010. Info: www.nesfa.org/ boskone/; [email protected]; Boskone 47, Box 809, Framingham, MA 01701; 617.776 (fax)
2-6 September 2010
AUSSIECON FOUR (68th World Science Fiction Convention) at Melbourne Convention and Exhibition Centre, Melbourne, Victoria, Australia. Guest of Honor: Kim Stanley Robinson; Artist Guest of Honor: Shaun Tan; Fan Guest of Honor: Robin Johnson. Membership from 1 January 2009 until some later date (see website for latest details): AUD 210, USD 175, CAD 185, GBP 100, EUR 120, JPY 16000; supporting membership AUD 70, USD 50, CAD 50, GBP 25, EUR 35, JPY 4900. This is the SF universe's annual get-together. Professionals and readers from all over the world will be in attendance. Talks, panels, films, fancy dress competition—the works. Nominate and vote for the Hugos. Info: www.aussiecon4.org.au/, [email protected], GPO Box 1212, Melbourne, Victoria, AUSTRALIA 3001
Copyright ? 2009 Anthony Lewis
* * * *
Running a convention? If your convention has a telephone or fax number, e-mail address, or web page, please let us know so that we can publish this information. We must have your information in hand SIX months before the date of your convention.
* * * *
Attending a convention? When calling conventions for information, do not call collect and do not call too late in the evening. It is best to include a S.A.S.E. when requesting information; include an International Reply Coupon if the convention is in a different country.
Visit www.analogsf.com for information on additional titles by this and other authors.