The Crosstime Engineer
Chuck Byrd
now. I remember reading that it was going to be re-released, but I can't
remember the publisher. Hell, I can't even remember the author. Has
anybody read it? Is it just another lost-in-time cliche?
I would appreciate any comments.
Thanks,
Chuck Byrd
Steven Silver
Leo Frankowski. Del Rey just re-released the first five books and
published a sixth.
--
Steven H Silver
shsi...@ameritech.net
http://www.sfsite.com/~silverag
Rich Horton
wrote:
>I've been looking for a copy of _The Crosstime Engineer_ for several months
>now. I remember reading that it was going to be re-released, but I can't
>remember the publisher. Hell, I can't even remember the author. Has
>anybody read it? Is it just another lost-in-time cliche?
>
The author is Leo Frankowski. The publisher was Del Rey.
The Cross-Time Engineer is rather fun. The remainder of the series is
mostly kind of bad, sometimes repellently so (as in the notorious
scene in which a rape problem is solved by halving the victim closeted
with her molester. Not too much later, all is solved, and they are a
happy couple.)
However, the worst of this series is nowhere near the depths plumbed
by his other novel, _Copernik's Rebellion_, which is easily one of the
worst SF novels of all time.
--
Rich Horton
EdLincoln
with the exception of the last two boks. It is arather well thought out take
on the "Connecticut Yankee in King Arthur's Court". The main character gets
zapped into 13th century Poland. He decides to bring about an early Industrial
Revolution in Eastern Europe so Poland can defeat the Mongol hordes that are
due to come soon. Near the end of the series is a fun book where the Polish,
armed with WorldWar I wepons, defeat the Mongol Hordes. I also liked the way
the author solved the problem of temporal paradoxes. Changing history creates a
new universe and timeline. There were some sily "wish fullfillment" sex
fantasies that I found amusing, but which one could find offensive.
John Moreno
> On Wed, 3 Mar 1999 22:01:02 -0600, "Chuck Byrd" <chu...@netdoor.com>
> wrote:
>
> >I've been looking for a copy of _The Crosstime Engineer_ for several months
> >now. I remember reading that it was going to be re-released, but I can't
> >remember the publisher. Hell, I can't even remember the author. Has
> >anybody read it? Is it just another lost-in-time cliche?
> >
> The author is Leo Frankowski. The publisher was Del Rey.
>
> The Cross-Time Engineer is rather fun. The remainder of the series is
> mostly kind of bad, sometimes repellently so (as in the notorious
> scene in which a rape problem is solved by halving the victim closeted
> with her molester. Not too much later, all is solved, and they are a
> happy couple.)
No, a rape problem is not solved by having the victim closted with her
molester -- instead a rape results in true love (and although I won't
argue with calling it rape, I will say the scene isn't described in
enough detail to get the likely emotional state. So it's more
incomplete than incorrect [of course you're right in at least one way,
this scene rang totally false to me]).
--
John Moreno
John Kensmark
"Chuck Byrd" <chu...@netdoor.com> wrote:
> I've been looking for a copy of _The Crosstime Engineer_ for several months
> now. I remember reading that it was going to be re-released, but I can't
> remember the publisher. Hell, I can't even remember the author. Has
> anybody read it? Is it just another lost-in-time cliche?
>
Leo Frankowski. I liked the first book, and the engineering stuff was
generally clever. It's basically another look at _A Connecticut Yankee in
King Arthur's Court_, except in late 13th century Poland.
The series has a few problems that, in my opinion, get worse and worse with
successive books, of which I read four (the end of the regular series). The
sexism became unbearable at times; I think female readers would be (maybe
ought to be? not my call) offended. The first book is worth reading, though,
I'd think.
John Kensmark
kens...@hotmail.com
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
John Moreno
> These are the fundamental structural problems with the book. The
> (authorially endorsed) rapes and Jew-hatred should have been edited
> out by any half-competent editor, but nothing worthwhile could have
> been built on such a rotten foundation.
Must be my day to defend this (sorta) "rape" singular, and I didn't
notice any Jew-hatred.
--
John Moreno
Rich Horton
wrote:
>No, a rape problem is not solved by having the victim closted with her
>molester -- instead a rape results in true love (and although I won't
>argue with calling it rape, I will say the scene isn't described in
>enough detail to get the likely emotional state. So it's more
>incomplete than incorrect [of course you're right in at least one way,
>this scene rang totally false to me]).
I should have checked the book, but I couldn't find it. Mea culpa.
--
Rich Horton
Rich Horton
(Joe Slater) wrote:
>There is something of a tradition in crosstime stories that the hero
>has some advantages - DeCamp's hero spoke Latin; Twain's was also an
>engineer. I haven't read the first volume of Stirling's _Sea of Time_
>story but I suspect that his Nantucket is rather better off than any
>real place would have been.
You could argue that these are the stories that get told. The stories
where the guy just dies don't get told, except for the one classic.
(Which I won't mention, for fear of spoilers.)
Your points about the Frankowski books are excellently made. I still
=enjoyed= the first, but it doesn't hold up to any critical thought.
--
Rich Horton
Joe Slater
>The series has a few problems that, in my opinion, get worse and worse with
>successive books, of which I read four (the end of the regular series). The
>sexism became unbearable at times; I think female readers would be (maybe
>ought to be? not my call) offended. The first book is worth reading, though,
>I'd think.
I disagree. Frankowski suffers from Robinson Crusoe syndrome: the hero
is supplied with anything likely to be of use, no matter how unlikely.
He just happens to be an engineer who knows about medieval technology
and a swordfighter who has just stopped off at a plant store and
bought some gengineered plants including magic roses and magic *wheat*
and he has this magic horse which eats wood and he has armor
impenetrable by anything else which makes him really cool and a great
fighter ...
After that, all he has to face are the problems of being a nobleman in
a society where thousands of beautiful girls want to sleep with you,
while their boyfriends stand by, gazing in admiration.
There is something of a tradition in crosstime stories that the hero
has some advantages - DeCamp's hero spoke Latin; Twain's was also an
engineer. I haven't read the first volume of Stirling's _Sea of Time_
story but I suspect that his Nantucket is rather better off than any
real place would have been. Frankowski just takes it all too far - he
wants to produce steel and Lo! he not only knows exactly how it's made
but finds coal, haematite and limestone all next to eachother.
Frankowski later retcons all the magic advantages by explaining that
his hero is being supervised by omnipotent time travellers. This
induced a great feeling of ennui: what's the point? Not only has his
hero every conceivable advantage of luck, equipment, skill and
position (having just been made Archduke of Silesia or somesuch) but
if anything bad happens he can always be retroactively rescued. Yawn.
These are the fundamental structural problems with the book. The
(authorially endorsed) rapes and Jew-hatred should have been edited
out by any half-competent editor, but nothing worthwhile could have
been built on such a rotten foundation.
jds
EdLincoln
Date: Thu, Mar 4, 1999 7:11 PM
>He just happens to be an engineer who knows about medieval technology
>and a swordfighter who has just stopped off at a plant store and
>bought some gengineered plants including magic roses and magic *wheat*
>and he has this magic horse which eats wood and he has armor
They havea good explanation for a lot of this. His cusin runs the time patrol.
The cousin found him in Poland twentyyearsafter he gotmarooned there. He
didn't want to createaparadox by going back 20 years to rescue him, so hewent
back 20 yearsandset everything up nice for him.
However, it does suffer from "Robinson Crusoe" syndrome in that the natives are
excessively accomadating and paternalisticly portrayed. This is not that
obvious in the first book. In the last one, "Lord Conrad's Quest for Rubber",
it gets downright silly.
The strong part of the series is the author's mastery of engineering and
technological History. It is really a greatseries.
pl...@newsreaders.com (John Moreno)
Date: Thu, Mar 4, 1999 9:13 PM
<<<<"Must be my day to defend this (sorta) "rape" singular, and I didn't
notice any Jew-hatred.">>>>
I don't remember either rape or antisemitism.
John Moreno
> pl...@newsreaders.com (John Moreno)
> <<<<"Must be my day to defend this (sorta) "rape" singular, and I didn't
> notice any Jew-hatred.">>>>
>
> I don't remember either rape or antisemitism.
Third book -- girl is K?? (the first one he shacks up with) and the guy
is his newly knighted accountant (and it's arranged by her and his
friends, and cheered when completed).
--
John Moreno
Joe Slater
>Date: Thu, Mar 4, 1999 7:11 PM
>>He just happens to be an engineer who knows about medieval technology
>>and a swordfighter who has just stopped off at a plant store and
>>bought some gengineered plants including magic roses and magic *wheat*
>>and he has this magic horse which eats wood and he has armor
edli...@aol.com (EdLincoln) wrote:
>They havea good explanation for a lot of this. His cusin runs the time patrol.
Do you think this is a *good* explanation? I think it's a bad one. The
exciting thing about this sort of story is seeing how the hero manages
to succeed by using his ingenuity. Once you say that there are people
secretly helping the hero then there's no point to the ingenuity,
because we know it's not real. Suppose you read a survival story where
you later found out that a tour director was secretly leaving bunches
of berries near where the hero sleeps, and was keeping an eye on him
in case he broke a leg. Wouldn't that make the story less exciting?
jds
Jake Kesinger
: Joe Slater <joeDEL...@yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au> wrote:
: > These are the fundamental structural problems with the book. The
: > (authorially endorsed) rapes and Jew-hatred should have been edited
: > out by any half-competent editor, but nothing worthwhile could have
: > been built on such a rotten foundation.
: Must be my day to defend this (sorta) "rape" singular, and I didn't
: notice any Jew-hatred.
Conrad forced interaction between the Jewish and Gentile communities.
(He kept them from esthablishing a Jewish Quarter/Ghetto).
He (Conrad, definitely, and possibly Frankowski) was not at all friendly,
however, towards the middle eastern refugees fleeing from the barbarians.
(Were the refugees Arabs? Turks? Something else?)
==Jake
Joe Slater
>: > These are the fundamental structural problems with the book. The
>: > (authorially endorsed) rapes and Jew-hatred should have been edited
>: > out by any half-competent editor, but nothing worthwhile could have
>: > been built on such a rotten foundation.
kesi...@math.ttu.edu (Jake Kesinger) wrote:
>Conrad forced interaction between the Jewish and Gentile communities.
>(He kept them from esthablishing a Jewish Quarter/Ghetto).
Yes, and I suppose he must have forbidden them to wear a yellow star,
too.
jds
Nancy Lebovitz
Joe Slater
>>has some advantages - DeCamp's hero spoke Latin; Twain's was also an
>>engineer. I haven't read the first volume of Stirling's _Sea of Time_
>>story but I suspect that his Nantucket is rather better off than any
>>real place would have been.
rrho...@concentric.net (Rich Horton) wrote:
>You could argue that these are the stories that get told.
Yes, and I think it's fair enough to give your hero *some* advantages.
I don't mid DeCamp's hero being a professor of ancient languages, or
whatever. He makes up for it later when he has very real problems
producing paper. Frankowski would have said something like "So I
chopped down a tree, got my magic horse to eat it and she defecated
the finest imitation vellum!"
DeCamp's hero started with parchment, ran out very quickly, located a
felt-maker and got him to produce batches of felt mixed with every
readily obtainable ingredient. One batch (using clay, I think) finally
produced a grade of thin felt that didn't make the ink run. This was
interesting and fun because the hero had no more information than I
did, but solved the problem logically. Harry Harrison did something
similar in one of his books - Deathworld II perhaps.
SF and detective stories share a characteristic: if the reader is
confronted with a problem, that problem should not be solved using
information denied to the reader. If we are told that there is a 100%
lethal plague, the plot should not be resolved by discovering that the
hero is in fact immune to it. Similarly, if the problem is that the
hero is abandoned and thrown upon his own resources, the resolution
should not be that he is in fact *not* thrown upon his own resources.
One bad resolution which I see all too often is this: there are malign
intelligences with powers beyond our comprehension. How can our hero
defeat them? Well, it turns out that our hero is potentially not only
a supergenius, but far smarter and more powerful than those
intelligences who acquiesce in the face of his superiority. Laumer
used this a few times, but we keep seeing it in fantasy, usually with
a heroine who has magical abilities poping up in a crisis which maker
her far smarter and more powerful than etc.
jds
Joseph Major
: John Kensmark <kens...@hotmail.com> wrote:
: >The series has a few problems that, in my opinion, get worse and worse with
: >successive books, of which I read four (the end of the regular series). The
: >sexism became unbearable at times; I think female readers would be (maybe
: >ought to be? not my call) offended. The first book is worth reading, though,
: >I'd think.
: I disagree. Frankowski suffers from Robinson Crusoe syndrome: the hero
: is supplied with anything likely to be of use, no matter how unlikely.
: He just happens to be an engineer who knows about medieval technology
: and a swordfighter who has just stopped off at a plant store and
: bought some gengineered plants including magic roses and magic *wheat*
: and he has this magic horse which eats wood and he has armor
: impenetrable by anything else which makes him really cool and a great
: fighter ...
I had this theory that he was really a Soviet _spetsnaz_ under
cover in the Polish army, which would explain why he could undertake this
special-forces type training to set up his army.
: After that, all he has to face are the problems of being a nobleman in
: a society where thousands of beautiful girls want to sleep with you,
: while their boyfriends stand by, gazing in admiration.
Well he did have this big anguish about being named "Schwartz", oh
the pain the pain! Why he didn't spell it to match the Polish
pronunciation -- "Szwarc", I believe -- or even translate it into Polish
-- "Czerny" -- is never mentioned. Of course, if it was really "Shwartz"
-- i.e., Yiddish, well . . . (Our hypothetical Soviet Special Tasks
trooper would be the son of a Polish Jewish Communist man and a Russian
woman.
: There is something of a tradition in crosstime stories that the hero
: has some advantages - DeCamp's hero spoke Latin; Twain's was also an
: engineer. I haven't read the first volume of Stirling's _Sea of Time_
: story but I suspect that his Nantucket is rather better off than any
: real place would have been. Frankowski just takes it all too far - he
: wants to produce steel and Lo! he not only knows exactly how it's made
: but finds coal, haematite and limestone all next to eachother.
: Frankowski later retcons all the magic advantages by explaining that
: his hero is being supervised by omnipotent time travellers. This
: induced a great feeling of ennui: what's the point? Not only has his
: hero every conceivable advantage of luck, equipment, skill and
: position (having just been made Archduke of Silesia or somesuch) but
: if anything bad happens he can always be retroactively rescued. Yawn.
Boy, the GRU (Soviet Military Intelligence) is even more powerful
than we thought!
: These are the fundamental structural problems with the book. The
: (authorially endorsed) rapes and Jew-hatred should have been edited
: out by any half-competent editor, but nothing worthwhile could have
: been built on such a rotten foundation.
These have been discussed elsewhere, but what bothered me about
the book was that Frankowski had the general uninformed and low level of
knowledge about religion that your usual SF writer has. In the third
book, as I recall, Conrad finds a group of priests who are burning some
old women. They explain that they are inquisitors come from Spain to hunt
witches.
Writers tend to use the witch-craze as sort of a generalized
motive -- I think feminist mythology about uppity women being witches is
involved. But the thirteenth century is too early for the witch-craze.
The Inquisition was limited to France at the time of the story,
extirpating the Cathari. An inquisitor, in any case, would have been
reporting to the Bishop of the diocese. And if Conrad had hanged any
priests on his own say-so, he would have been in big trouble with the
Church.
Not to mention that to speak of "Spain" in the thirteenth century
is just too anachronistic for words.
Joseph T Major
--
bgarid
<36f88899....@news.bigpond.com>, joeDEL...@yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au
wrote:
>>>has some advantages - DeCamp's hero spoke Latin; Twain's was also an
>>>engineer. I haven't read the first volume of Stirling's _Sea of Time_
>>>story but I suspect that his Nantucket is rather better off than any
>>>real place would have been.
>
>>You could argue that these are the stories that get told.
>
>Yes, and I think it's fair enough to give your hero *some* advantages.
>I don't mid DeCamp's hero being a professor of ancient languages, or
>whatever. He makes up for it later when he has very real problems
>producing paper. Frankowski would have said something like "So I
>chopped down a tree, got my magic horse to eat it and she defecated
>the finest imitation vellum!"
Reading this thread got me interested and I bought the book today. After first
100 pages, I think I can determine the genre, because I've run into a few
similar titles before.
It's meant to be fun and not to be taken seriously!
Certainly any comparison with Stirling is false. Stirling is always serious.
This Frankowski guy is not.
He doesn't care about the rules, because it's more fun that way.
PS. I don't mind talking horses really. It's cute.
EdLincoln
few types ofstorieswhere the hero changes the world by building something,
rather than by just destroying an evil whatsit or fullfilling a prophecy.
Also, it is a rare opportunity for a "thinker hero" and an exploration of the
underpinning of a technological society. The hero has to be slightly larger
than life, brilliant, etc, but that istrue in a lot of fiction, and is part of
the point.
Of course, the society Conrad designed was totalitarian/fascist/communist.
Everyone who wanted to be a part of anything important had to join a
paramilitary organization, put on a uniform, obey orders, etc. One
organization ran all technology, therewas no room for individual entrepenerial
capitalism or innovation. I have similar objections to "Island in the sea of
Time" and thestar Trek federation.
James C. Ellis
>
> They havea good explanation for a lot of this. His cusin runs the
> years to rescue him, so hewent back 20 yearsandset everything up nice
> for him.
Yes, but IIRC this _makes no sense_!
They didn't want to alter the timeline by preventing him from
stumbling back in time, but they were willing to cure his acne (and
possibly some venereal disease as I recall)?!? They were willing to
f*ck with the timeline some more to ease things for him?
Totally absurd!
Biff
--
-------------------------------------------------------------------
"Me? Lady, I'm your worst nightmare - a pumpkin with a gun.
[...] Euminides this! " - Mervyn, the Sandman #66
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Craig West
+>Of course, the society Conrad designed was totalitarian/fascist/communist.
+>Everyone who wanted to be a part of anything important had to join a
+>paramilitary organization, put on a uniform, obey orders, etc. One
+>organization ran all technology, therewas no room for individual entrepenerial
+>capitalism or innovation. I have similar objections to "Island in the sea of
+>Time" and thestar Trek federation.
Remember, Conread was supposed to be a 'good' Communist, and believed in
socialism. What was more interesting, is that his designed 'Communist' system
had more of the appearance of capitalism than Conrad was comfortable with.
--
Craig West Ph: (905) 821-8300 | It's not a bug,
Pulse Microsystems Fx: (905) 821-7331 | It's a feature...
2660 Meadowvale Blvd, Unit #10 | acw...@echo-on.net
Mississauga, Ont., Canada L5N-6M6 | cr...@pulsemicro.com
Jake Kesinger
: Conrad forced interaction between the Jewish and Gentile communities.
: (He kept them from esthablishing a Jewish Quarter/Ghetto).
Let me clarify this.
In the book (in the book!), the Jews (or at least the leadership) wanted
to remain partitioned from the Gentile population. Conrad, claiming
that this bred resentment, distrust, etc. in both groups, refused.
==Jake
bgarid
<MT2E2.2354$gU1....@axe.netdoor.com>, "Chuck wrote:
>
>
>
>>>Yes, and I think it's fair enough to give your hero *some* advantages.
>>>I don't mid DeCamp's hero being a professor of ancient languages, or
>>>whatever. He makes up for it later when he has very real problems
>>>producing paper. Frankowski would have said something like "So I
>>>chopped down a tree, got my magic horse to eat it and she defecated
>>>the finest imitation vellum!"
>>
>>Reading this thread got me interested and I bought the book today. After
>first
>>100 pages, I think I can determine the genre, because I've run into a few
>>similar titles before.
>>
>>It's meant to be fun and not to be taken seriously!
>>
>>Certainly any comparison with Stirling is false. Stirling is always
>serious.
>>This Frankowski guy is not.
>>
>>He doesn't care about the rules, because it's more fun that way.
>>
>>PS. I don't mind talking horses really. It's cute.
>>
>
>Expanding the topic a bit: What do you think are the best cross-time books?
>
>I guess Mark Twain started it all with the Connecticut Yankee. Then there
>was DeCamp's _Lest Darkness Fall_.
>
>When I started thinking about it, I've read quite a few books of this type.
>Here are the ones I can remember:
>
>The Glory That Was (can't remember the author)
>The Ship That Sailed The Time Stream, and
>To Sail the Century Sea, by C.G. Edmonson (sp.)
>William Forschten's _Lost Regiment_ series (good battle series, but very
>gruesome)
>The Misplaced Legion, by Harry Turtledove, I think
>
>and, of course, S.M. Stiriling's _An Island in the Sea of Time_
>
>You could even stretch it and include Jerry Pournelle's Janissaries books.
>I really enjoyed those, and wish he would write more.
>
>Any others?
Niven, Larry, Gerrold, David, "The Flying Sorcerers", 1970.
Actually Frankowski attitude reminds me of this one.
>
>Chuck
>
Evelyn C. Leeper
Chuck Byrd <chu...@netdoor.com> wrote:
>
> Expanding the topic a bit: What do you think are the best cross-time books?
>
> I guess Mark Twain started it all with the Connecticut Yankee. Then there
> was DeCamp's _Lest Darkness Fall_.
>
> When I started thinking about it, I've read quite a few books of this type.
> Here are the ones I can remember:
>
> The Glory That Was (can't remember the author)
de Camp again, but not really cross-time.
> The Ship That Sailed The Time Stream, and
> To Sail the Century Sea, by C.G. Edmonson (sp.)
G. C. Edmonson
> William Forschten's _Lost Regiment_ series (good battle series, but very
> gruesome)
> The Misplaced Legion, by Harry Turtledove, I think
>
> and, of course, S.M. Stiriling's _An Island in the Sea of Time_
S. M. Stirling (I assume this was just a typo).
> You could even stretch it and include Jerry Pournelle's Janissaries books.
> I really enjoyed those, and wish he would write more.
You missed one of the best, Robert Silverberg's UP THE LINE. Or are
you counting only those in which the time travel is accidental?
I have a certain fondness for Marlys Millhiser's MIRROR.
And there's always the ever-popular REPLAY by Ken Grimwood.
--
Evelyn C. Leeper | evelyn...@geocities.com
+1 732 957 2070 | http://www.geocities.com/Athens/4824
"The remarkable thing about Shakespeare is that he really is very good,
in spite of all the people who say he is very good." --Robert Graves
Ahasuerus
> Chuck Byrd <chu...@netdoor.com> wrote:
> [snip]
>> The Ship That Sailed The Time Stream, and
>> To Sail the Century Sea, by C.G. Edmonson (sp.)
>
G. C. Edmondson :-) whose full name is Jose Mario Garry Ordonez Edmondson
y Cotton. No, really :)
> You missed one of the best, Robert Silverberg's UP THE LINE [snip]
YMMV. I could never understand what the fuss was all about, but OTOH it
*was* nominated for the Hugo award, so somebody must like it. On the
gripping hand, Silverberg asked to have it removed from the list, so I
guess he wasn't too fond of it either :)
--
Ahasuerus
Joe Slater
>> These are the fundamental structural problems with the book. The
>> (authorially endorsed) rapes and Jew-hatred should have been edited
>> out by any half-competent editor, but nothing worthwhile could have
>> been built on such a rotten foundation.
pl...@newsreaders.com (John Moreno) wrote:
>Must be my day to defend this (sorta) "rape" singular, and I didn't
>notice any Jew-hatred.
I got rid of my copies, but there was a lengthy passage where he
explained that Jews think non-Jews are dirty and that they call
non-Jews cattle.
jds
Joe Slater
>: Conrad forced interaction between the Jewish and Gentile communities.
>: (He kept them from esthablishing a Jewish Quarter/Ghetto).
kesi...@math.ttu.edu (Jake Kesinger) wrote:
>In the book (in the book!), the Jews (or at least the leadership) wanted
>to remain partitioned from the Gentile population. Conrad, claiming
>that this bred resentment, distrust, etc. in both groups, refused.
I found that very offensive. It's like writing a book where a Black
community demands the right to sit on the porch all day eating
watermelon, and our noble white hero explains that that's why Whites
don't like Blacks, so they ought to work for a living. It's racist,
paternalistic, arrogant, stupid and just bad writing. Frankowski
delivers more lectures than Heinlein, but at least Heinlein's were
usually worth arguing about.
jds
coredump
>On Fri, 5 Mar 1999 23:24:58 -0600, in article
><MT2E2.2354$gU1....@axe.netdoor.com>, "Chuck wrote:
>>
>>You could even stretch it and include Jerry Pournelle's Janissaries books.
>>I really enjoyed those, and wish he would write more.
He is currently working on the next book in that series. The 'working
title' is MAMELUKES, but it will probably change. Don't know the
publication date, but it's at about 35,000 words and growing.
Watch www.jerrypournelle.com for progress reports.
>>
>>Any others?
>
>Niven, Larry, Gerrold, David, "The Flying Sorcerers", 1970.
>
>Actually Frankowski attitude reminds me of this one.
>
>>
>>Chuck
John
>>
--
core...@NOSPAM.enteract.com
www.enteract.com/~coredump
Breaking the speed limit on the Information Superhighway
John Moreno
> kesi...@math.ttu.edu (Jake Kesinger) wrote:
> >In the book (in the book!), the Jews (or at least the leadership) wanted
> >to remain partitioned from the Gentile population. Conrad, claiming
> >that this bred resentment, distrust, etc. in both groups, refused.
>
> I found that very offensive. It's like writing a book where a Black
> community demands the right to sit on the porch all day eating
> watermelon, and our noble white hero explains that that's why Whites
> don't like Blacks, so they ought to work for a living. It's racist,
> paternalistic, arrogant, stupid and just bad writing. Frankowski
> delivers more lectures than Heinlein, but at least Heinlein's were
> usually worth arguing about.
I don't see this at all -- they weren't wanting to be set up in luxury,
they simply wanted an area where there laws and customs were observed
instead of whatever the locals did.
Although it's not quite the same thing, we do it all of the time today
when we are setting up Embassies, and that is also what happens when a
large chunk of land is sold to another country (specifically Alaska and
the Louisiana Purchase, bases in the Philippines and throughout the rest
of the world).
--
John Moreno
John Moreno
-snip-
> pl...@newsreaders.com (John Moreno) wrote:
> >I didn't notice any Jew-hatred.
>
> I got rid of my copies, but there was a lengthy passage where he
> explained that Jews think non-Jews are dirty and that they call
> non-Jews cattle.
At the same time saying that the locals thought the Jews were kidnapping
their children for use in human sacrifices -- he was simply saying that
the separation bread distrust and that each side thought the worst of
the other.
--
John Moreno
John Moreno
> pl...@newsreaders.com (John Moreno) wrote:
> >I don't see this at all -- they weren't wanting to be set up in luxury,
> >they simply wanted an area where there laws and customs were observed
> >instead of whatever the locals did.
>
> Ghettoes were places were Jews were *forced* to live. They couldn't
> live in the city per se; they were confined to these tiny slums. Many
> cities had residency laws - no Jews could enter the ghetto unless
> another Jew had left or died; no marriages could take place unless
> there was one fewer family than before. Ghettoes are signs of
> persecution, and Frankowski describes it as those darned Jews
> demanding the right to be free from the common law.
I don't know if he was right or not but he said that was what they
/became/ not how they started out. In any case it's SF I don't think
it's too much to allow him the luxury of saying that is how it worked in
his universe.
--
John Moreno
John Moreno
> pl...@newsreaders.com (John Moreno) wrote:
> >At the same time saying that the locals thought the Jews were kidnapping
> >their children for use in human sacrifices -- he was simply saying that
> >the separation bread distrust and that each side thought the worst of
> >the other.
>
> There are no thirteenth-century Poles around today, but there are
> plenty of Jews. And Frankowski said something like "Jews call non-jews
> `goyim', which means `cattle'". This is antisemitic tosh and can be
> refuted by looking in any decent dictionary.
I don't know about 'goyim' (either in the text or in real life), but I
do have a question -- because there are no 13th century poles around
it's ok to insult them?
--
John Moreno
John S. Novak, III
>> Ghettoes were places were Jews were *forced* to live. They couldn't
>> live in the city per se; they were confined to these tiny slums. Many
>> cities had residency laws - no Jews could enter the ghetto unless
>> another Jew had left or died; no marriages could take place unless
>> there was one fewer family than before. Ghettoes are signs of
>> persecution, and Frankowski describes it as those darned Jews
>> demanding the right to be free from the common law.
>I don't know if he was right or not but he said that was what they
>/became/ not how they started out. In any case it's SF I don't think
>it's too much to allow him the luxury of saying that is how it worked in
>his universe.
Embarassingly, I don't actually know what the true and oiginal history
of the ghetto system is. However, for the moment, let us assume that
it always was and started out as a persecutory system: In that case,
since we're not talking about an alternate history, but about a
history which is supposed to be our own, this becomes revisionist
history, and a particularly unsettling brand of it.
--
John S. Novak, III j...@concentric.net
The Humblest Man on the Net
Joe Slater
>> I got rid of my copies, but there was a lengthy passage where he
>> explained that Jews think non-Jews are dirty and that they call
>> non-Jews cattle.
pl...@newsreaders.com (John Moreno) wrote:
>At the same time saying that the locals thought the Jews were kidnapping
>their children for use in human sacrifices -- he was simply saying that
>the separation bread distrust and that each side thought the worst of
>the other.
There are no thirteenth-century Poles around today, but there are
plenty of Jews. And Frankowski said something like "Jews call non-jews
`goyim', which means `cattle'". This is antisemitic tosh and can be
refuted by looking in any decent dictionary.
jds
Joe Slater
>> I found that very offensive. It's like writing a book where a Black
>> community demands the right to sit on the porch all day eating
>> watermelon, and our noble white hero explains that that's why Whites
>> don't like Blacks, so they ought to work for a living. It's racist,
>> paternalistic, arrogant, stupid and just bad writing. Frankowski
>> delivers more lectures than Heinlein, but at least Heinlein's were
>> usually worth arguing about.
pl...@newsreaders.com (John Moreno) wrote:
>I don't see this at all -- they weren't wanting to be set up in luxury,
>they simply wanted an area where there laws and customs were observed
>instead of whatever the locals did.
Ghettoes were places were Jews were *forced* to live. They couldn't
live in the city per se; they were confined to these tiny slums. Many
cities had residency laws - no Jews could enter the ghetto unless
another Jew had left or died; no marriages could take place unless
there was one fewer family than before. Ghettoes are signs of
persecution, and Frankowski describes it as those darned Jews
demanding the right to be free from the common law.
jds
Peter McCutchen
Jake Kesinger wrote in message <7bnql6$q...@ttacs7.ttu.edu>...
>: Must be my day to defend this (sorta) "rape" singular, and I didn't
>: notice any Jew-hatred.
>
>Conrad forced interaction between the Jewish and Gentile communities.
>(He kept them from esthablishing a Jewish Quarter/Ghetto).
>
I realize that you weren't the on to initially characterize these actions as
"Jew hatred," but it does seem rather odd to think of preventing forced
segregation as an example of hatred. We typically think the opposite.
Peter McCutchen
Chuck Byrd wrote in message ...
>
>Expanding the topic a bit: What do you think are the best cross-time
books?
>
>I guess Mark Twain started it all with the Connecticut Yankee. Then there
>was DeCamp's _Lest Darkness Fall_.
>
>When I started thinking about it, I've read quite a few books of this type.
>Here are the ones I can remember:
>
>The Glory That Was (can't remember the author)
>To Sail the Century Sea, by C.G. Edmonson (sp.)
>gruesome)
>The Misplaced Legion, by Harry Turtledove, I think
>
>and, of course, S.M. Stiriling's _An Island in the Sea of Time_
>
Well, my personal favorite is still _Lord Kalvan of Otherwhen_. Although he
knows rather more about military history than your average Pennsylvania
State Trooper, or at least so I would guess.
John Moreno
> John Moreno <pl...@newsreaders.com> wrote:
-snip-
> >I don't know if he was right or not but he said that was what they
> >/became/ not how they started out. In any case it's SF I don't think
> >it's too much to allow him the luxury of saying that is how it worked in
> >his universe.
>
> Embarassingly, I don't actually know what the true and oiginal history
> of the ghetto system is. However, for the moment, let us assume that
> it always was and started out as a persecutory system: In that case,
> since we're not talking about an alternate history, but about a
> history which is supposed to be our own, this becomes revisionist
> history, and a particularly unsettling brand of it.
Maybe it's just me, but I tend to consider any world where time travel
is possible an alternate world. I would only give them a hard time if
the difference leads to somewhere that could never happen without that
difference and it is glossed over (for instance having a confederate
soldier from 1982 travel back in time to 12th century england).
--
John Moreno
Joe Slater
>I realize that you weren't the on to initially characterize these actions as
>"Jew hatred," but it does seem rather odd to think of preventing forced
>segregation as an example of hatred. We typically think the opposite.
The patronising and implicitly racist bit comes from claiming that
they *wanted* that sort of segregation. If Jews had wanted in ghettoes
there wouldn't have been so many laws forcing them to live there. As I
said in an earlier message, it would be like someone saying that he
forced Blacks to work rather than sit on their porches, which causes
White racism. This implies that Blacks *don't* want to work and that
rather than their predicament being the result of racism, it is the
cause of it.
jds
bgarid
<36e428d1....@news.bigpond.com>, joeDEL...@yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au
wrote:
>
>"Peter McCutchen" <p.mcc...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>I realize that you weren't the on to initially characterize these actions as
>>"Jew hatred," but it does seem rather odd to think of preventing forced
>>segregation as an example of hatred. We typically think the opposite.
>
>The patronising and implicitly racist bit comes from claiming that
>they *wanted* that sort of segregation. If Jews had wanted in ghettoes
>there wouldn't have been so many laws forcing them to live there. As I
You are really mistaking here very different periods.
Jews were oppressed in Jewish Pale of Settlement of the Russian empire
(1791-1917), a privileged minority as a Jewish Estate of the Polish-Lithuanian
Commonwealth(16-18 centuries) and immigrants/refugees seeking shelter in Piast
Poland of 13 century.
You are confusing them all together.
gromgorru
gromgorru
John Moreno wrote in message
<1do8vg0.1lg...@roxboro0-0055.dyn.interpath.net>...
>Joe Slater <joeDEL...@yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au> wrote:
>
>-snip-
>
>> pl...@newsreaders.com (John Moreno) wrote:
>>
>> explained that Jews think non-Jews are dirty and that they call
>> non-Jews cattle.
>
>their children for use in human sacrifices -- he was simply saying that
>the separation bread distrust and that each side thought the worst of
>the other.
Conrad expresses a lot of opinions.
IMO, the main reason for periodic interludes
exhibiting his time-traveling cousin is to show
that Francowski doesn't necessarily subscribes
to Conrad's opinions.
bgarid
Sorry to interrupt, but I am just finishing the part on Mongol invasion. So I
was wondering if anyone is interested to discuss it.
That business of slaughtering three million Mongols seems somewhat overdone...
I think Frankowski got carried away a bit. He didn't care about historical
authencity till that moment anyway , but here he just threw away all
plausibility.
So from then on, it should be considered a fantasy novel.
Mongols obviously stand here for orcs. Or maybe goblins. Never knew the
difference.
Conrad is err.., Frodo?
I am not sure who is Gandalf here. Perhaps someone more knowledgable could point
out
>
>
John Boston
says...
>
>Evelyn C. Leeper <e...@hobcs1.lucent.com> wrote:
>> Chuck Byrd <chu...@netdoor.com> wrote:
>> [snip]
>>> To Sail the Century Sea, by C.G. Edmonson (sp.)
>>
>
>G. C. Edmondson :-) whose full name is Jose Mario Garry Ordonez Edmondson
>y Cotton. No, really :)
>
>> You missed one of the best, Robert Silverberg's UP THE LINE [snip]
>
>YMMV. I could never understand what the fuss was all about, but OTOH it
>*was* nominated for the Hugo award, so somebody must like it. On the
>gripping hand, Silverberg asked to have it removed from the list, so I
>guess he wasn't too fond of it either :)
Or maybe he just had another book on the list and didn't want to
compete with himself. If memory serves, he also withdrew DYING INSIDE
from competition for either Hugo or Nebula. Actually, forget memory
(so to speak); I have an old copy of deVore's Hugo/Nebula history here,
which indicates I am wrong and Silverberg did not have another novel
on either ballot in competition with UP THE LINE. DeVore also doesn't
confirm that either UP THE LINE or DYING INSIDE was withdrawn, though
it does mention withdrawal of THE WORLD INSIDE. Got a better source?
John Boston
Rich Horton
wrote:
>The Glory That Was (can't remember the author)
This is by L. Sprague de Camp, and
SPOILER
It's not a "crosstime" or back in time book. It's set in the future,
and the Greek society is completely artificial.
--
Rich Horton
John Kensmark
joeDEL...@yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au (Joe Slater) wrote:
> John Kensmark <kens...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>
>> The series has a few problems that, in my opinion, get worse and worse
>> with successive books, of which I read four (the end of the regular
>> series). The sexism became unbearable at times; I think female readers
>> would be (maybe ought to be? not my call) offended. The first book is
>> worth reading, though, I'd think.
>
> I disagree. Frankowski suffers from Robinson Crusoe syndrome: the hero
> is supplied with anything likely to be of use, no matter how unlikely.
This isn't the Robinson Crusoe syndrome, although it's closely related. It's
the Swiss Family Robinson syndrome. Man, I must've read that book half a
dozen times when I was a kid--that island they landed on was like a cross
between Eden and Wal-Mart.
My favorite moment in _Robinson Crusoe_ is when Crusoe, newly shipwrecked,
takes off all his clothes, swims out to the wreck, and stuffs his pockets
full of nails. Ouch! Talk about determined to survive! My brother has
pointed out that, in Crusoe's day, perhaps taking off all of one's clothes
meant leaving a good deal of underwear on, including stuff with pockets. I
find this unlikely in the context of the story; I think the author simply
made a mistake.
> He just happens to be an engineer who knows about medieval technology
> and a swordfighter who has just stopped off at a plant store and
> bought some gengineered plants including magic roses and magic *wheat*
> and he has this magic horse which eats wood and he has armor
> impenetrable by anything else which makes him really cool and a great
> fighter ...
Actually, I didn't think the seeds were abnormal; they may have been, and I
may have forgotten. Also, he didn't get the superduper armor; he went into
the wrong store.
Granted, things are just a tad too easy for him, but I think the real
entertainment of this story is not how Conrad overcomes adversity but rather
what he builds and how he goes about it. I *did* only recommend the first
book. I did like the snowball fight, though, if I remember correctly.
> After that, all he has to face are the problems of being a nobleman in
> a society where thousands of beautiful girls want to sleep with you,
> while their boyfriends stand by, gazing in admiration.
Yes; it got a bit whiffy, and pretty quickly.
> Frankowski later retcons all the magic advantages by explaining that
> his hero is being supervised by omnipotent time travellers. This
> induced a great feeling of ennui: what's the point?
I basically agree. The timetravellers should've been left out entirely, I
think. I'd rather not have known how Conrad got back in time than be saddled
with the confused and undermining subplot.
John Kensmark
kens...@hotmail.com
-----------== Posted via Deja News, The Discussion Network ==----------
http://www.dejanews.com/ Search, Read, Discuss, or Start Your Own
Peter McCutchen
EdLincoln wrote in message <19990305135350...@ng16.aol.com>...
>Of course, the society Conrad designed was totalitarian/fascist/communist.
>Everyone who wanted to be a part of anything important had to join a
>paramilitary organization, put on a uniform, obey orders, etc. One
>organization ran all technology, therewas no room for individual
entrepenerial
>capitalism or innovation. I have similar objections to "Island in the sea
of
>Time" and thestar Trek federation.
Well, one problem with Stirling's economics, is that if a free-market system
works better here and now for various structural reasons, there's no reason
to believe it wouldn't also work better for Nantucketeers sent back in time.
Nonetheless, I was willing to buy it in _Island_, not because it would in
fact work better, but rather because many people might believe that it would
work better. And the society in _Island_ is small enough that they might
just have been able to make a go of it. Kind of like a kibbutz.
Coyu
>Well, one problem with Stirling's economics, is that if a free-market system
>works better here and now for various structural reasons, there's no reason
>to believe it wouldn't also work better for Nantucketeers sent back in time.
>Nonetheless, I was willing to buy it in _Island_, not because it would in
>fact work better, but rather because many people might believe that it would
>work better. And the society in _Island_ is small enough that they might
>just have been able to make a go of it. Kind of like a kibbutz.
Well, if the first ten chapters of the sequel online are any indication,
the Nantucketers go Smithian with a vengeance. Adam even gets quoted.
Martin Wisse
wrote:
>
>EdLincoln wrote in message <19990305135350...@ng16.aol.com>...
>
>>Of course, the society Conrad designed was totalitarian/fascist/communist.
>>Everyone who wanted to be a part of anything important had to join a
>>paramilitary organization, put on a uniform, obey orders, etc. One
>>organization ran all technology, therewas no room for individual
>entrepenerial
>>capitalism or innovation. I have similar objections to "Island in the sea
>of
>>Time" and thestar Trek federation.
>
>Well, one problem with Stirling's economics, is that if a free-market system
>works better here and now for various structural reasons, there's no reason
>to believe it wouldn't also work better for Nantucketeers sent back in time.
>Nonetheless, I was willing to buy it in _Island_, not because it would in
>fact work better, but rather because many people might believe that it would
>work better. And the society in _Island_ is small enough that they might
>just have been able to make a go of it. Kind of like a kibbutz.
But the Nantucketans did set up a free market system once they where
reasonably settled, didn't they? Whathisface, the sheriff, even remarked that
now he knew why socialism doesn't work: too many decisions to make.
Martin Wisse
Thomas E. Francis
Chuck Byrd wrote:
> William Forschten's _Lost Regiment_ series (good battle series, but very
> gruesome)
Actually, for someone that does not write historical
fiction, the Lost Regiment series is fairly accurate
in terms of what those type of battles were like.
If you think Lost Regiment is gooey, try Bernard
Cornwell's "Richard Sharpe " series - now that's
blood 'n guts the way it should be written.
Later,
Tom Francis (mailto:to...@neca.com)
John Moreno
> EdLincoln wrote in message <19990305135350...@ng16.aol.com>...
>
> >Of course, the society Conrad designed was
> >totalitarian/fascist/communist. Everyone who wanted to be a part of
> >anything important had to join a paramilitary organization, put on a
> >uniform, obey orders, etc. One organization ran all technology, therewas
> >no room for individual entrepenerial capitalism or innovation. I have
> >similar objections to "Island in the sea of Time" and thestar Trek
> >federation.
>
> Well, one problem with Stirling's economics, is that if a free-market system
> works better here and now for various structural reasons, there's no reason
> to believe it wouldn't also work better for Nantucketeers sent back in time.
> Nonetheless, I was willing to buy it in _Island_, not because it would in
> fact work better, but rather because many people might believe that it would
> work better. And the society in _Island_ is small enough that they might
> just have been able to make a go of it. Kind of like a kibbutz.
I think your misrepresenting _Island in the Sea of Time_ -- they didn't
have economics at the start, what they had was a drastic shortage of
everything and no organization. So they started over at the beginning
-- everything was tossed into the same pool, the emergency situation was
handled. Once they got beyond that they seemed to be moving back to a
free-market system fairly quickly.
--
John Moreno
Ahasuerus
>> [Ahasuerus wrote:]
>>YMMV. I could never understand what the fuss was all about, but OTOH it
>>*was* nominated for the Hugo award, so somebody must like it. On the
>>gripping hand, Silverberg asked to have it removed from the list, so I
>>guess he wasn't too fond of it either :)
>
> Or maybe he just had another book on the list and didn't want to
> compete with himself. If memory serves, he also withdrew DYING INSIDE
> from competition for either Hugo or Nebula. Actually, forget memory
> (so to speak); I have an old copy of deVore's Hugo/Nebula history here,
> which indicates I am wrong and Silverberg did not have another novel
> on either ballot in competition with UP THE LINE. DeVore also doesn't
> confirm that either UP THE LINE or DYING INSIDE was withdrawn, though
> it does mention withdrawal of THE WORLD INSIDE. Got a better source?
Yes, _The World Inside_ (1972) was withdrawn in favor of _A Time of
Changes_, which didn't win either - he *still* hasn't won a Hugo for any
of his 70+ SF/F novels. Silverberg's Quasi-Official Web Site
(http://www.connectexpress.com/~jon/silvhome.htm) lists _Up the Line_ as a
contender both for the Nebula (1969) and the Hugo (1970) awards, but
doesn't say anything about it being withdrawn in either case. I'll have to
try and find the article in which he mentioned that he was unhappy with
_Up the Line_ having been nominated because he thought he was producing
better work at the time, but it may not be easy given how many articles he
has written since 1970. Or you can send e-mail to:
username jon
host connectexpress.com
and ask him to ask Silverberg.
--
Ahasuerus
Ahasuerus
> Chuck Byrd wrote:
>
>> William Forschten's _Lost Regiment_ series (good battle series, but very
>> gruesome)
>
> Actually, for someone that does not write historical
> fiction, the Lost Regiment series is fairly accurate
To quote Al von Ruff:
>He is on The Net (WFors...@aol.com), and updated his bio in the ISFDB.
>It states that he received a PhD from Purdue in 1994; his dissertation
>topic was: "The 28th USCTs: Indiana's African Americans Go to War,
>1863-1865"
--
Ahasuerus
Peter McCutchen
Joe Slater wrote in message <36e428d1....@news.bigpond.com>...
>"Peter McCutchen" <p.mcc...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>>I realize that you weren't the on to initially characterize these actions
as
>>"Jew hatred," but it does seem rather odd to think of preventing forced
>>segregation as an example of hatred. We typically think the opposite.
>
>The patronising and implicitly racist bit comes from claiming that
>they *wanted* that sort of segregation. If Jews had wanted in ghettoes
>there wouldn't have been so many laws forcing them to live there. As I
>forced Blacks to work rather than sit on their porches, which causes
>White racism. This implies that Blacks *don't* want to work and that
>rather than their predicament being the result of racism, it is the
>cause of it.
Ah. I see your point. Not having read the book, I was unaware of this
particular element.
Graydon
<p.mcc...@worldnet.att.net> wrote:
>EdLincoln wrote in message
><19990305135350...@ng16.aol.com>...
>>Of course, the society Conrad designed was
>>totalitarian/fascist/communist. Everyone who wanted to be a part of
>>anything important had to join a paramilitary organization, put on a
>>uniform, obey orders, etc. One organization ran all technology,
>>therewas no room for individual entrepenerial capitalism or
>>innovation. I have similar objections to "Island in the sea of Time"
>>and thestar Trek federation.
>
>Well, one problem with Stirling's economics, is that if a free-market
>system works better here and now for various structural reasons,
>there's no reason to believe it wouldn't also work better for
>Nantucketeers sent back in time.
Sure there is; they don't have enough liquid capital.
The capital they _do_ have is all capital plant, and they haven't got
any obvious market mechanism to assign ownership of that capital, so
it gets held in common.
>Nonetheless, I was willing to buy it in _Island_, not because it
>would in fact work better, but rather because many people might
>believe that it would work better. And the society in _Island_ is
>small enough that they might just have been able to make a go of it.
>Kind of like a kibbutz.
They did start setting up individual businesses pretty quickly in
:Island:, once they'ed managed to arrange circumstances so that there
was liquid capital.
I don't think I'm understanding the substance of your complaint with
:Island:.
--
graydon@ | Hige sceal ţe heardra, heorte ţe cenre,
lara.on.ca | mod sceal ţe mare ţe ure maegen lytlađ.
| -- Beorhtwold, "The Battle of Maldon"
Sakura
Joe Slater <joeDEL...@yoyo.cc.monash.edu.au> wrote:
>
>There are no thirteenth-century Poles around today, but there are
>plenty of Jews.
There are no 13th century Jews around today, but there are plenty of
Poles. I think your example here is not only twisted, but outright
sprained.
>And Frankowski said something like "Jews call non-jews
>`goyim', which means `cattle'". This is antisemitic tosh and can be
>refuted by looking in any decent dictionary.
What proof do we have that Frankowski's beliefs are the same as Conrad's?
Is Frankowski a Communist and a polygamist and a statutory rapist as well?
J
--
Hostes aliengeni me abduxerent. Jeff Johnston - je...@io.com
Qui annus est? http://www.io.com/~jeffj
Rick
>
> What proof do we have that Frankowski's beliefs are the same as Conrad's?
> Is Frankowski a Communist and a polygamist and a statutory rapist as well?
Statutory rape would have little meaning in the 13th Century.
Sakura
Conrad was not from the 13th century.
He was raised in a culture where (presumably) the term did have meaning,
although he does not seem to have a strong moral belief that statutory
rape is wrong - after all, he does it repeatedly in a time & place where
he knows there will be no social or legal repercussions. This suggests to
me that Conrad didn't do such things in the 20th century out of a fear of
the consequences, and not because he believed it was morally wrong.
Rick
>
> In article <36E3F2...@mindspring.com>,
> Rick <rikw...@mindspring.com> wrote:
> >Sakura wrote:
> >>
> >> What proof do we have that Frankowski's beliefs are the same as Conrad's?
> >> Is Frankowski a Communist and a polygamist and a statutory rapist as well?
> >
> >Statutory rape would have little meaning in the 13th Century.
>
> Conrad was not from the 13th century.
>
> He was raised in a culture where (presumably) the term did have meaning,
> although he does not seem to have a strong moral belief that statutory
> rape is wrong - after all, he does it repeatedly in a time & place where
> he knows there will be no social or legal repercussions. This suggests to
> me that Conrad didn't do such things in the 20th century out of a fear of
> the consequences, and not because he believed it was morally wrong.
>
Was there such as thing as statutory rape in Communist Poland, which is
where Conrad was presumably from? Although he had spent time in the US,
Poland was his home. I have no idea what the laws are in Poland or what
they were under the former regime.
David Joseph Greenbaum
in fleeting electrons:
: There are no 13th century Jews around today, but there are plenty of
: Poles. I think your example here is not only twisted, but outright
: sprained.
Pray, could you point me to these thirteenth century Poles?
: What proof do we have that Frankowski's beliefs are the same as Conrad's?
: Is Frankowski a Communist and a polygamist and a statutory rapist as well?
The book is as much will-fulfilment on the part of the author as it is
artistic creation; I think Conrad Stargard is Leo's heroic fantasy of
himself. The books are a neat read for an impressionable
fourteen-year-old with indiscriminating taste. For an adult, however,
I'd hope the juvenile and frankly *bent* aspects of the series would
shine through. They are most decidedly not historical fiction.
Dave G.
--
Such fragrance -
from where,
which tree?
David Navarro
>
> Expanding the topic a bit: What do you think are the best cross-time books?
>
> I guess Mark Twain started it all with the Connecticut Yankee. Then there
> was DeCamp's _Lest Darkness Fall_.
>
> When I started thinking about it, I've read quite a few books of this type.
> Here are the ones I can remember:
>
> The Glory That Was (can't remember the author)
> The Ship That Sailed The Time Stream, and
> To Sail the Century Sea, by C.G. Edmonson (sp.)
> William Forschten's _Lost Regiment_ series (good battle series, but very
> gruesome)
> The Misplaced Legion, by Harry Turtledove, I think
>
> and, of course, S.M. Stiriling's _An Island in the Sea of Time_
>
> You could even stretch it and include Jerry Pournelle's Janissaries books.
> I really enjoyed those, and wish he would write more.
>
> Any others?
>
> Chuck
Tim Powers' _The Anubis Gates_
That's a pretty good one, in the sense that the hero has enormous
problems making a living in eighteenth-century London. All his
knowledge is basically irrelevant.
--
___________________________________________________
David Navarro http://www.alcaudon.com
___________________________________________________
In the beginning there was nothing, which exploded.
-Terry Pratchett
Sakura
David Joseph Greenbaum <dj...@cornell.edu> wrote:
>In a fit of divine composition, Sakura (je...@schultz-2.io.com) inscribed
>in fleeting electrons:
>
>: There are no 13th century Jews around today, but there are plenty of
>: Poles. I think your example here is not only twisted, but outright
>: sprained.
>
>Pray, could you point me to these thirteenth century Poles?
Please re-read. Notice I did not say '13th century Poles'. The omission
was intentional. Quoted in my post (which you excised for some reason)
was the statement:
"There are no thirteenth-century Poles around today, but there are plenty
of Jews."
You'll notice the symmetry. My point was that it's a bit misleading to
talk about 13th century Poles as if there were no Poles today, while
talking about 13th century Jews as if they were exactly the same as modern
Jews.
>: What proof do we have that Frankowski's beliefs are the same as Conrad's?
>: Is Frankowski a Communist and a polygamist and a statutory rapist as well?
>
>The book is as much will-fulfilment on the part of the author as it is
>artistic creation; I think Conrad Stargard is Leo's heroic fantasy of
>himself.
I agree that there are almost certainly elements of wish-fulfillment in
the work, but even this does not mean that Frankowski shares all - or even
most - of Conrad's beliefs.
Michael Johns
>What proof do we have that Frankowski's beliefs are the same as Conrad's?
>Is Frankowski a Communist and a polygamist and a statutory rapist as well?
He was guest at Duckon II. I hadn't read his novels then so I may not
have been picking up on the right cues but he didn't say anything to
me to indicate that he thought well of communism. In the stories,
Conrad is a good communist but he constantly frets that because he
has to bootstrap his operation in a capitalist environment that his
setup is too capitalist. I got the feeling that the author was hinting
that Conrad would eventually give up avoiding capitalism. In the stories
seen so far much of the industrial power has been turned to fighting a powerful
common enemy. There has been little opportunity to discover whether people
will create wealth for the common good in this universe when this threat
didn't exist.
Mike Johns
JoatSimeon
>So they [in ISLAND] started over at the beginning -- everything was tossed
into the same pool, the emergency situation was handled. Once they got beyond
that they seemed to be moving back to a free-market system fairly quickly.
-- correct. I thought this was obvious, but obviously not... 8-).
Even having the main character muse to himself: "Thank God we can get back to
a market economy" doesn't do it, it seems!
-- S.M. Stirling
JoatSimeon
growing wish-fulfillment -- was the 3,000,000 Mongols invading Poland.
It's soothing to European vanity think of the Mongols as having overwhelming
numbers, but in fact they were outnumbered in every major battle. Subotai and
Batu Khan never had more than 60,000 men in the field, and they were usually
divided into at least two field forces.
They won because they were better organized and more skillful and more mobile
than the bunch of iron-headed feudal donkeys-in-armor they were fighting. If
Ogedai hadn't drunk himself to death in the middle of the campaign, it would
have been kitty-bar-the-door all the way to the Rhine.
-- S.M. Stirling
bgarid
<19990313140338...@ng28.aol.com>, joats...@aol.com wrote:
>
>The thing that turned me off the "Crosstime Engineer" series -- apart from the
>growing wish-fulfillment -- was the 3,000,000 Mongols invading Poland.
Me too. Up to that point it was bearable...
>It's soothing to European vanity think of the Mongols as having overwhelming
>numbers, but in fact they were outnumbered in every major battle. Subotai and
>Batu Khan never had more than 60,000 men in the field, and they were usually
>divided into at least two field forces.
Mongol army of the period was 129 thousand(as of 1229), of which in 1236-42
majority were employed in campaign against Korea, North China(a messy war of
attrition with Mongols stopping to storm every Sung fortress on the way), Asia
Minor and Caucasus(Chormogan against Georgia, Armenia, Seljuks, splinter
Khawresmians and even Crusaders), India (Mongol raid into Punjab in 1239),
suppressing revolt in Bukhara in 1238 (reportedly 30,000 Mongols were diverted
to deal with rebels). And a few more places ranging from Amur river to
Himalayas.
Ogedei ordered every Mongol family to send one son for the Western campaign. If
we recall that total army size (ie, entire adult males population) was 130,000
that makes it no more than 30-40 thousand. Of course, Batu khan was granted a
permission to recruit locals into his army as necessary. So if we take that into
account, Batu's army size throughout 1236-1242 fluctuated somewhere around
50-100 thousand range.
And in Western campaign, this army fought
a) Kipchags(estimated 50-100 thousand warriors)
b) Volga Bulgars(around 50 thousand)
c) Russians(some 100,000 total)
d) Poles and Germans(70,000)
e) Hungarians(100,000)
f) Bulgarians(50,000)
g) Czechs(70,000)
etc.
And won.
>They won because they were better organized and more skillful and more mobile
>than the bunch of iron-headed feudal donkeys-in-armor they were fighting. If
>Ogedai hadn't drunk himself to death in the middle of the campaign, it would
There are suspicions that he was poisoned.
>have been kitty-bar-the-door all the way to the Rhine.
Rhine? What's so interesting there?
It is obvious that Batu and Subudai were planning to go into Italy sending corps
of Baidu and Kaidar to Austria, to guard against Louis and Germans while the
main army crushes Pope, emperor and Lombard League.
>-- S.M. Stirling
JBassior
>Even having the main character muse to > himself: "Thank God we can get back
>to a market economy" doesn't do it, it seems!
It seemed pretty obvious to me that "Island" was pro-capitalist, I'm not sure
why people thought otherwise. Emergency pooling of resources in a survival
situation is no more anti-capitalist than is giving away food and shelter as
part of a disaster relief effort.
Sincerely Yours,
Jordan
bgarid
Ahasuerus wrote:
>
>JoatSimeon <joats...@aol.com> wrote:
>> The thing that turned me off the "Crosstime Engineer" series -- apart from
>> the growing wish-fulfillment -- was the 3,000,000 Mongols invading
>
>"At the time, those tribes of herdsmen had a population of over eight
>million, of which three million counted as fighting me." _The Flying
>Warlord_, p.157.
Mongolia in 13 century had about 1 million. Western steppe another million(of
which European steppe from Danube to Volga only 300-400,000).
>
>But the juiciest quote is on page 158: "In fact, the Germans were [always]
>lousy fighters and their strategy was always absurd."
And three sentences below:
"Because the Mongols were originally a Caucasian people, not an Oriental one.
They only became Oriental after conquest of China... when for a hundred years,
five or six generations, every Mongolian man came home with a dozen Chinese
wives. A thing like that changes the blood lines pretty thoroughly."
And what I like best:
"The Mongol of later centuries, was racially abd culturally a totally different
animal."
Methinks Frankowski learned his anthropology from "Nordic Egyptians" school...
>
>--
>Ahasuerus
Ahasuerus
> The thing that turned me off the "Crosstime Engineer" series -- apart from
> the growing wish-fulfillment -- was the 3,000,000 Mongols invading
> Poland. [snip]
"At the time, those tribes of herdsmen had a population of over eight
million, of which three million counted as fighting me." _The Flying
Warlord_, p.157.
But the juiciest quote is on page 158: "In fact, the Germans were [always]
lousy fighters and their strategy was always absurd."
--
Ahasuerus
JohnnyPez9
>Emergency pooling of resources in a survival
>situation is no more anti-capitalist than is giving away food and shelter as
>part of a disaster relief effort.
The British didn't think so during the Irish potato famine.
Johnny Pez
The TRUTH is as weird as ANY LIE. -- Rev. Ivan Stang
JoatSimeon
>The British didn't think so during the Irish potato famine.
-- actually they did, or over 3 million would have died, rather than slightly
under 1 million. 700,000 heads of families were in receipt of relief or
famine-related public works wages at the height of the famine. That's not
counting substantial private donations from England and Scotland, and very
large sums which the British government forced Irish landlords to disburse.
"Never attribute to malice or conspiracy that which can be explained by
stupidity or incompetence."
The British government's means of gathering intelligence (to find out what was
actually going on) and of dispensing relief ranged from "inadequate" to
"nonexistant" at the time.
-- S.M. Stirling
JBassior
Hint: what does this tell you about how highly the British regarded the Irish
Catholics in the 1840's?
Sincerely Yours,
Jordan
Steve Patterson
>
[snip]
>Batu's army size throughout 1236-1242 fluctuated somewhere around
>50-100 thousand range.
>
>And in Western campaign, this army fought
>
>a) Kipchags(estimated 50-100 thousand warriors)
>b) Volga Bulgars(around 50 thousand)
>c) Russians(some 100,000 total)
>d) Poles and Germans(70,000)
>e) Hungarians(100,000)
>f) Bulgarians(50,000)
>g) Czechs(70,000)
>etc.
>
>And won.
It's amazing how many enemies you can defeat if they come at you one at a
time. (cf. Horatius at the Bridge)
Mongol victories were triumphs of political union and sound tactics over
fractious and bumptuous idiots. Their victories in Europe are one of the
better arguments that there was indeed a Dark Age after the Roman collapse.
--
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Note: My "from:" address has been altered to foil mailbots.
Remove the "no_spam_" to get in touch with me by email.
@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@@
Steven J. Patterson no_spam_s...@wwdc.com
"Men may move mountains, but ideas move men."
-- M.N. Vorkosigan, per L.M. Bujold
See my refurbished webpage! http://www.wwdc.com/~spatterson
Phil Fraering
>Jordan writes:
>>Emergency pooling of resources in a survival
>>situation is no more anti-capitalist than is giving away food and shelter as
>>part of a disaster relief effort.
>The British didn't think so during the Irish potato famine.
Wasn't that caused at least in part because of price controls
on grain, which laws were changed after the famine ended?
Phil
--
"I see a great hand, reaching out of the stars. Phil Fraering
The hand is your hand. And I hear sounds. The p...@globalreach.net
sounds of billions of people calling your name." /Will work for *tape*/
"My followers?" "Your victims."
Phil Fraering
>On 13 Mar 1999 19:03:38 GMT, in article
><19990313140338...@ng28.aol.com>, joats...@aol.com wrote:
>>The thing that turned me off the "Crosstime Engineer" series -- apart from
>>the growing wish-fulfillment -- was the 3,000,000 Mongols invading Poland.
The positive electrons should have tipped you off earlier :-)
>Me too. Up to that point it was bearable...
>>It's soothing to European vanity think of the Mongols as having overwhelming
>>numbers, but in fact they were outnumbered in every major battle. Subotai
>>and Batu Khan never had more than 60,000 men in the field, and they were
>>usually divided into at least two field forces.
>Mongol army of the period was 129 thousand(as of 1229), of which in 1236-42
>majority were employed in campaign against Korea, North China(a messy war of
>attrition with Mongols stopping to storm every Sung fortress on the way), Asia
>Minor and Caucasus(Chormogan against Georgia, Armenia, Seljuks, splinter
>Khawresmians and even Crusaders),
Hey, you mean there were Crusaders in the Caucasus? They
must have been really lost, I guess.
>Ogedei ordered every Mongol family to send one son for the Western campaign.
>If we recall that total army size (ie, entire adult males population) was
>130,000 that makes it no more than 30-40 thousand. Of course, Batu khan was
>granted a permission to recruit locals into his army as necessary. So if we
>take that into account, Batu's army size throughout 1236-1242 fluctuated
>somewhere around 50-100 thousand range.
>And in Western campaign, this army fought
>a) Kipchags(estimated 50-100 thousand warriors)
>b) Volga Bulgars(around 50 thousand)
>c) Russians(some 100,000 total)
>d) Poles and Germans(70,000)
>e) Hungarians(100,000)
>f) Bulgarians(50,000)
>g) Czechs(70,000)
>etc.
>And won.
>>They won because they were better organized and more skillful and more mobile
>>than the bunch of iron-headed feudal donkeys-in-armor they were fighting. If
>>Ogedai hadn't drunk himself to death in the middle of the campaign, it would
>There are suspicions that he was poisoned.
>>have been kitty-bar-the-door all the way to the Rhine.
>Rhine? What's so interesting there?
>It is obvious that Batu and Subudai were planning to go into Italy sending
>corps of Baidu and Kaidar to Austria, to guard against Louis and Germans
>while the main army crushes Pope, emperor and Lombard League.
I wish I knew enough about Italian history to guess how that would
have turned out.
Depending on how well they worked at recruiting locals, and
exploiting disunity among Europeans, they probably would have
gotten somewhere...
Phil Fraering
>>pgf
>>Wasn't that caused at least in part because of price controls on grain, which
>laws were changed after the famine ended?
>-- not really. You're thinking of the Corn Laws,
>which put a sliding scale of
>duties on imported grain depending on the price.
I'm fairly sure there was another form of "price floor"
regulation in there somewhere.
>In point of fact, the Irish peasantry couldn't afford even the cheapest
>imported grain (the duties were cancelled for relief shipments during the
>famine).
>That's why they lived on potatoes.
>-- S.M. Stirling
The British government also had grain stockpiles on Ireland itself,
which they decided to keep from distributing until things got
desperate; however, when they went to actually use the stuff,
they found out it had gotten contaminated.
Or so I've heard.
JoatSimeon
>Wasn't that caused at least in part because of price controls on grain, which
laws were changed after the famine ended?
-- not really. You're thinking of the Corn Laws, which put a sliding scale of
duties on imported grain depending on the price.
In point of fact, the Irish peasantry couldn't afford even the cheapest
John F. Eldredge
>>Johnny Pez9
>
>>The British didn't think so during the Irish potato famine.
>
I have read that the Prime Minister in office at the time that the
potato famine started did support considerable relief efforts, but the
expenditures were unpopular with the English public, resulting in a
more reactionary government coming to power that cut back on the
relief.
--
John F. Eldredge -- eldr...@poboxes.com
PGP key available from http://www.netforward.com/poboxes/?eldredge/
--
"There must be, not a balance of power, but a community of power;
not organized rivalries, but an organized common peace." - Woodrow Wilson
JoatSimeon
>I have read that the Prime Minister in office at the time that the potato
famine started did support considerable relief efforts, but the
expenditures were unpopular with the English public, resulting in a more
reactionary government coming to power that cut back on the relief.
-- nope. The politics involved are far too complex to really outline here --
the role of Peel, the controversy over the Corn Laws, etc. You'll have to read
up on it; I suggest the Oxford History of Britain for a good short summary.
Basically, you've got to remember that everyone expected hunger -- people died
of starvation all the time, even in England, and the majority of English people
were runty and undernourished and never got enough to eat -- but nobody
expected, or had the facilities to cope with, a famine of the magnitude of
46-49.
There was no CNN in those days. News travelled fairly fast -- there were
telegraphs -- but it didn't have the breadth or impact that it does now, even
among the literate public.
-- S.M. Stirling