“I came back for my own purposes,” said the Time Traveler, looking around my booklined study. “I chose you to talk to because it was . . . convenient. And I don’t want you to do a goddamned thing. There’s nothing you can do. But relax . . . we’re not going to be talking about personal things. Such as, say, the year, day, and hour of your death. I don’t even know that sort of trivial information, although I could look it up quickly enough. You can release that white-knuckled grip you have on the edge of your desk.”
I tried to relax. “What do you want to talk about?” I said.
“The Century War,” said the Time Traveler.
I blinked and tried to remember some history. “You mean the Hundred Year War? Fifteenth Century? Fourteenth? Sometime around there. Between . . . France and England? Henry V? Kenneth Branagh? Or was it . . .”
“I mean the Century War with Islam,” interrupted the Time Traveler. “Your future. Everyone’s.” He was no longer smiling. Without asking, or offering to pour me any, he stood, refilled his Scotch glass, and sat again. He said, “It was important to me to come back to this time early on in the struggle. Even if only to remind myself of how unspeakably blind you all were.”
“You mean the War on Terrorism,” I said.
“I mean the Long War with Islam,” he said. “The Century War. And it’s not over yet where I come from. Not close to being over.”
(more)
I tried to relax. “What do you want to talk about?” I said.
“The Century War,” said the Time Traveler.
I blinked and tried to remember some history. “You mean the Hundred Year War? Fifteenth Century? Fourteenth? Sometime around there. Between . . . France and England? Henry V? Kenneth Branagh? Or was it . . .”
“I mean the Century War with Islam,” interrupted the Time Traveler. “Your future. Everyone’s.” He was no longer smiling. Without asking, or offering to pour me any, he stood, refilled his Scotch glass, and sat again. He said, “It was important to me to come back to this time early on in the struggle. Even if only to remind myself of how unspeakably blind you all were.”
“You mean the War on Terrorism,” I said.
“I mean the Long War with Islam,” he said. “The Century War. And it’s not over yet where I come from. Not close to being over.”
(more)
Wow, what an inflammatory peice of crap.
ReplyDeleteThe story went off track early on with his suggestion that declaring war on Islam is the equivalent of the U.S. declaration of war on Japan in 1941.
Sorry, that would be more the equivalent of the U.S. decision to get involved in Europe being cast as a "War On Christianity". After all, the Nazis were an oh-so-Christian organization, complete with a blessing from the pope. Nazis were Christians, therefore we should have been mowing down all the Christians we could get our hands on.
Having unwisely decided to let this slide, I continued to read his quite fanciful description of how an Islamic empire would treat religious minorities. For a supposedly historically based essay, he sure seemed to have skipped the history of the Islamic empires. Of course, given our own Christian empire's history with religious minorities (particularly the Jews) I can understand why he'd be frightened.
Last but not least, there's this business about a Caliphate. A Caliphate is the wet dream of every person who wants to have more than a bunch of assholes with bombs to fight. It is the equivalent of the satirists call for Al Queda to declare a homeland so we can bomb it. When the Shi'a and the Sunni stop kicking the shit out each other on a regular basis maybe -- just maybe -- we can start worrying about a central Islamic authority emerging. Don't count on it any time soon.
That said, I really have no idea how the "War on Terror" is going. I do know that it appears to have been used as a thin excuse to annex Iraq into the American Empire, but that doesn't tell me much about the rest of it.
The problem is that progress against assholes with bombs is mostly measured in a lack of attacks. I can tell you that since 9/11, there have been no further attacks on U.S. soil. No one has even chosen the simple expedient of strapping dynamite to themselves and detonating themselves in the foyer at city hall. For that I am thankful, whatever the reason.
In any case, declaring war on a religion for the fact that assholes claim to be acting in its name is a very bad idea. Not that it hasn't been tried before, of course, but historically there have not been good results from that.
Last but not least, I can only hope that Dan Simmons did not mean his story as an elaborate troll. If so he did not pull off the sense of irony necessary to declare later that he was just baiting people. He's stuck with this puppy, and I'm willing to bet it will haunt him a long time.
To echo Tim K., Simmons is regurgitating the same tired old shit that the war hawks are saying now. Islam is designed to hate you. Islam worships martyrs.
ReplyDeleteNewsflash: so does Christianity! And Judaism! How many "stone them if they do this" clauses are there in the Bible?
I read that story with the growing awe that the man appears to believe that a billion people want him dead, or converted...and yet, somehow misses the fact that hundreds of millions of Western Christians think -exactly the same thing- about Muslims. It's a cultural thing. Are they acting on it?
Only if we allow these foolish opinions to go unanswered.
PS: Got your email, won't be able to answer until my Internet shows up next week. Writing this from the parents' house.
After thinking about it a bit, I guess some context for the story would help. After all, Margaret Atwood gave it pretty good to the Christians in The Handmaiden's Tale, and it was quite well received.
ReplyDeleteIt could be a form problem. If he expanded it out into a novel, with some literary merit instead of just a weak historical analogy and some Islam bashing he might be able to make something out of it.
His dialogue does have a nice rhythm to it. I wish I could write dialogue that sounded like that.
TimK's description of the caliphate made my entire fucking day. I follow Lind's comments on 4th generation warfare with interest, and TimK is right that EVERYONE in the bush regime desperately wants a 2nd generation war, which we are ready to fight. When I am feeling forgiving of bush (not often) I think that's the reason we went to Iraq. Then I remember that he's just a lying autocrat who will say anything to excuse the attempt to empire (now it's a VERB!).
ReplyDeleteMuch like Tom Cruise and Mel Gibson, once a media purveyor pisses me off, I lose interest in their work. It is easy to forget that novelists are human; unlike hollywood celebrities, they actually have to have a functioning brain to make a living. However nowadays I have no interest in Orson Scott Card, due to his rants on religion and equal rights for homosexuals, etc. Now this short fiction has put Simmons on my radar to be wary of koo-koo thought processes.
Dan Simmons' "message" in that piece was really worrisome. Not only was it... I'll use your word: inflammatory... but it had so many trappings of "THIS IS THE WAY THINGS ARE. THIS IS HOW THINGS WILL BECOME." -- I was just shaken by his ego, and the number of manipulative structural tricks he used.
I was just shaken by his ego, and the number of manipulative structural tricks he used.
ReplyDeleteHe is definitely talented in that regard. He reminds me a little of Heinlein actually. I remember reaching the end of Starship Troopers and thinking "Hey, military dictatorships are great! I want to live in one!"
I've sometimes tried to emulate this style in my own writing, complete with the strawman arguments and the sympathetic protagonist who is slowly convinced by the unrelenting "logic" provided by the authoritative voice. It's actually not a hard trick, and it is quite effective regardless of the topic.
"Hey, military dictatorships are great! I want to live in one!"
ReplyDeleteYeah, I think I had the same feeling. And I am still torn over supporting and not-supporting the idea that people who want to participate in the government need to contribute to it in some way, like serving in the armed forces. Unfortunately I think it would be abused, and the rich types would find themselves in cushy, do-nothing positions, like attendance optional posts in the Texas Air National Guard, learning to fly planes that are unused in current theaters-of-war, and the poor would still find themselves being driven into the most meatgrinder like scenarios like, say, The National Guard being sent to hold Iraq, but not being properly provisioned to do so.
Hey, it could happen.
Yeah, I go back and forth over making a provision that in particular the President be required to have seen real combat. He or she is the head of the armed forces, after all, and has authority to deploy troops, start the fighting, and in general do anything just short of declaring war.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately the only socially acceptable way to see real combat is to be in the military, and I'm not sure I want only ex-military guys running the country.
Actually, by "participate in government" I meant like Starship Troopers, where only people who serve become citizens, and only citizens can vote.
ReplyDeleteUnfortunately right now there are a couple of related vicious circles that prevent this from being a good idea. I don't think countries with established mandatory service have these vicious circle problems.