Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Kahuna Burger" data-source="post: 3935400" data-attributes="member: 8439">Well, compared to his other books that I have read, it contained a lot more cheerleading for the system. It wasn't just happening to be set there, you had the (to me jarringly out of place) little lectures on the system. You also had the system presented not as something that was questioned by characters in the book, but defined as having worked for a very long time without any sort of serious challenge (iirc, it was even stated that it was the only system that was immune to revolution because anyone capable of revolution would be given the franchise.)A book that presents a system and opposition to it may be advocating the system, advocating its opposite, advocating questioning as a good in and of itself or just using the conflict as a storytelling opportunity. But is it really that big a leap to read a book which presents a system, presents scholarly musings on how awesome the system is, presents just plain folk declarations of how awesome the system is and casually tells us that the system has worked without significant dissent for generations and get the impression that the author is advocating the system?  <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/paranoid.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":uhoh:" title="Paranoid    :uhoh:" data-shortname=":uhoh:" /> I'm certainly open to authorial statements to the contrary, but it's just not that strange that people think of ST as a statement of political opinion. It read like one to me, and I've read some others of his books which took a very different tone to political issues.</blockquote>

Verification