China Mieville on D&D

[Wulf Ratbane]

...You shouldn't discard both author and book (and rob yourself of a great reading experience in the process) just because you dislike the choice of words and what they imply in combination with the political beliefs of a (again: *fantasy*) author.

If I had infinite amounts of time and money to spend on such pursuits, I admit, I can't imagine not wanting to read and to experience everything.

But since both my time and money are finite, I have to make decisions where to spend it.

Under those conditions, I'm willing to discard both author and book precisely because I disagree with his choice of words and what they imply in combination with his political beliefs. That seems to me like a fine set of reasons to justify not reading something; if that doesn't justify it, what would?

Would it be somehow more acceptable not to read Mieville because folks here have said, "If you like Planescape, you'll love Mieville..."-- and I don't like Planescape? Would that be ok?

 

[eris404]

Under those conditions, I'm willing to discard both author and book precisely because I disagree with his choice of words and what they imply in combination with his political beliefs. That seems to me like a fine set of reasons to justify not reading something; if that doesn't justify it, what would?

As much as I hate it when someone doesn't like a book or author or movie I love, I would hate even more to force it on someone. I think the interview is pretty representative of him as an author, so no matter what anyone says, you'd probably wouldn't dig him. :\

 

[Tav_Behemoth]

China Mieville is my favorite living author*....
PS: Jack Vance technically beats him out, but his output has slowed to a crawl due to health issues.

Yeah, I noticed the quotes from Vance's "Guyal of Sfere" and Mieville's Perdido Street Station in Dungeon 121 with great pleasure.

For my part, I'd have to give the nod for "favorite living author who's not Jack Vance" to Gene Wolfe, but I'm sure that Mr. Wolfe shares our hopes that the master will be around making that qualification necessary for many years to come.

 

[Akrasia]

I hear that Shakespeare fellow is a monarchist. I find that to be a politically indefensible position. No way am I going near that Shakespeare crap!

--------------

Really, if I only read books by authors who shared my political beliefs, I suspect that I would be reading very few books indeed.

I don't agree with Mieville's political views, but it is hard to deny that he is one of the more innovative fantasy authors out there today.

And it is so obvious that he played AD&D!

 

[Mirth]

It's funny, but now I want to buy his books because of his political beliefs and his proud geekfulness. To each his own, I guess, but this a good example of why we don't talk about politics here.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

It's funny, but now I want to buy his books because of his political beliefs and his proud geekfulness. To each his own, I guess, but this a good example of why we don't talk about politics here.

The invisible hand at work.

 

[Banshee16]

I don't think it would cross the forum rules to say that, based on the article, Mieville inserts his politics into his writing. I don't think he could have said it more clearly.

So to walk away from that makes just as much sense as, say, walking away from Asimov if you read an intereview where he goes on about Robots and you simply have no interest in his take on Robots.

So when I read an exerpt like this:

"Weather Wrightby, for all that he’s a bastard, and a murderer, and a capitalist, and an exploiter, he’s also..."

I just assume he's probably not going to have much to say that would interest me, and certainly nothing so compelling to say to me that I'd put one cent in his pocket.

It's too bad you'd make that assumption, as the books are quite good, whether you're a communist, a democrat, a socialist, or whatever.

If you're concerned about putting money into his pocket because he espouses a different belief, then borrow the book from the library, where it costs nothing, and then read it. Really, a great author. I was *very* hesitant moving into his books, thinking they'd be "out there", but they ended up being superior to just about anything I've read in several years (fantasy-wise, that is).

I've never understood the attitude of boycotting literature, or reading someone's viewpoint, just because it disagrees with one's own. In any case, this is bordering on political discussion, so I'll stop there.

I definitely recommend giving them a try. Steampunk, very evocative writing style, very deep characters, and overall, very well done. I agree that if you like Planescape, you'll likely love the books.

Banshee

 

[Banshee16]

Would it be somehow more acceptable not to read Mieville because folks here have said, "If you like Planescape, you'll love Mieville..."-- and I don't like Planescape? Would that be ok?

Then I'd say "you don't like Planescape? You're nuts!

Kidding!

Hey, if you don't like that aspect of fantasy like Planescape, Spelljammer, etc., then you probably won't enjoy his novels, and maybe it's not a good idea to try. They're definitely not the Tolkien-derived clones that most modern fantasy series are. But some people like that, and everyone has a right to an opinion.

Banshee

 

[Ryltar]

If I had infinite amounts of time and money to spend on such pursuits, I admit, I can't imagine not wanting to read and to experience everything.

But since both my time and money are finite, I have to make decisions where to spend it.

Under those conditions, I'm willing to discard both author and book precisely because I disagree with his choice of words and what they imply in combination with his political beliefs. That seems to me like a fine set of reasons to justify not reading something; if that doesn't justify it, what would?

Would it be somehow more acceptable not to read Mieville because folks here have said, "If you like Planescape, you'll love Mieville..."-- and I don't like Planescape? Would that be ok?

What Banshee said.

Yes, saying "I don't like Mieville" because you do not like a certain style of fiction (or his writing style in particular, after having read one of his books) is fine with me. I could even understand someone not reading a book because the author's political beliefs are mirrored perfectly within - let's say, a world in which everything has communist/ fascist / whatever extremism-ist tendencies. Saying "this book's gotta be horrible" just because one particular character in that book behaves in a certain way - and there are others that behave in the exactly opposite way! - seems a little, well, extreme to me in itself. If that character was dubbed a "slaver" or "someone who makes other people work and suffer for him, while he obviously doesn't care about them, only his profits", would that be any different? I'm wondering.

Just trying to understand your reasoning there.

 

[BryonD]

I've never understood the attitude of boycotting literature, or reading someone's viewpoint, just because it disagrees with one's own. In any case, this is bordering on political discussion, so I'll stop there.

Two erroneous assumptions in your statement.

1: Choosing not to buy something yourself is not a boycott.
I find that I can not keep up with everything that I want to read as is, so something isn't going to get read. There's got to be some criteria for determing which stuff fits under enjoyable material I don't have time for umbrella.

2: Choosing not to read recreational literature does not equate to avoiding that person's viewpoint. While I don't read Mieville's lit, I have actively searched (online) for his opinion stuff a couple times. Being informed on viewpoints is a more valueable use of time than purely recreational reading.

I find his viewpoints to equate to advocating assault against my economic freedom. I don't feel any concern over choosing a more agreeable author for my recreation time.