posted
Well, I finished it this afternoon. I hope I don't have to wait another 6 years for her to write another book.
I enjoyed it, though I was troubled by the combination of the main character's apparent age and some sexual situations she gets in.
I really don't want to give away too much of the plot so I'm going to stop there, except to say this is very much an Octavia Butler book and has the feel of many of her other novels. If you enjoy Ms Butler and can see past the problem I mentioned in the 2nd paragraph then you will probably enjoy this book.
posted
Don't most Anne Rice books have bisexuals? I haven't read them (other than Interview With a Vampire) but my husband said that they do.
I'm not sure if I like Octavia Butler or not. I've only read Wild Seed, and I was thoroughly hooked for most of it, but by the end I had somehow stopped caring about the characters. I guess I need to read some more of her stuff to see if I'll like her other work better.
quote:And as a side note, Yay! a book with bisexuals!
LOL
I really, really liked some of her other books, so I will give this one a try.
I remember I rad OSC's book on writing, and he said that magic has to have a cost....otherwise it is too easy. Also, the greater teh cost, the better the story, as long as it fits the story.
I think Butler is the perfect example of great writing, adn she doesn't sually write my type of stories...I usually read fantasy.
But her books are really good.
Posts: 15082 | Registered: Jul 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
I'm so glad you posted this; I had no idea that Butler had a new book out!! Guess I'm sending Mr. Opera to the bookshop on his lunch break tomorrow.
posted
I went to my usual bookstore tonight, only to discover that they hadn't yet ordered any copies. > Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
I thought the first 50 pages or so were pretty bad. There was a bit too much repetition with her memory loss and I found it quite boring. Had it not been Octavia Butler, I would have put the book down and not picked it back up. However, once the action picked up I found myself enjoying it more. Like Pix, I found some of the sexual situations uncomfortable due to the apparant age/appearance of the main character. I wonder why Butler made that choice? I also found the relationships between the 2 species a bit too much like the relationships between species in her "Dawn" trilogy. I was disappointed that she wasn't more original. I also thought the book ended too abruptly, but I'm thinking that there will be another 2 to follow since Butler normally writes in trilogies. Overall, it was decent but not her best work. I'll read the next one and hope it's better.
posted
Ooooh, a new Octavia Butler book! <puts it on her wish list>
One thing I love about her is that her books don't have happy endings, but the people take what happens, however unhappy that situation is, and make a new life out of it which is still good, despite the circumstances.
Wild Seed was my favorite, and the whole patternist series after it. I can't wait to read the new book.
Posts: 6246 | Registered: Aug 2004
| IP: Logged |
The book made me uneasy -- the human-Ina relationship had a lot of similarities with the telepath-mute and human-alien relationships Butler's depicted in the past, but unlike those previous books, Fledgling never really seems to question whether such an unequal relationship can ever be ethical. (We're shown unethical relationships, of course, but the reading I got was that they were bad because of the fault of those particular Ina.)
I was also disappointed by the clunkiness of some of the exposition. It probably wouldn't have bothered me in another writer, but as Card notes, delicately revealing information is something Butler is -good- at. The main character's amnesia seems to have disrupted that.
I want to like this book, really I do. I certainly don't regret reading it. But I'm not sure I'll be able to bring myself to read it again.
Posts: 650 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I finally got a copy, and read it yesterday and today. I enjoyed it thoroughly, thought I definitely agree that the exposition was handled more clumsily than is typical for her.
I am getting a bit tired of her recycling plot elements and ideas, I have to say. It seems like Kindred and the two Parable books are the only ones in which she isn't going over more or less the exact same ground she's been covering for decades.
Posts: 16059 | Registered: Aug 2000
| IP: Logged |
posted
I liked that book. The main character was very strong an dself assured... I am reading it again.
Posts: 9942 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
I liked the book, too. I just finished it. I agree that the relationships are very similar to the xenogenisis books, and also to the patternist books. I also agree that there's a deep question whether such relationships can be truly equal, that she doesn't seem to explore fully. It's really talking about slavery, almost. Maybe it's sort of partly about how people survive as slaves. I don't know what to make of it. It's also a fully interdependent marriage, though. And the good guys always do have a real give and take in their connection. It's not just one sided. Though always that's just because they're good people, like ambyr said. It doesn't really explore how the inherent power imbalance sets up the probability of bad relationships in those situations.
The sexuality of Shori didn't bother me, because it was clear to everyone that she was not human, and not actually a child, beforehand. The humans were also under the influence of her venom, which presumably changed their behavoir a good deal. It's clear that Wright didn't pick her up hoping to take advantage of her, but simply because she seemed to be a little kid in obvious need of help. So I didn't find the sex disturbing.
During the proceedings, I also got a really strong feeling of the Harry Potter books. Like I almost expected the Silk family to call Shori a mudblood, you know? I pictured the elder Silk as Lucius Malfoy, with his white hair. I wonder if Octavia Butler realized how similar they were?
Something very cool happened at my office Thursday. We had this lunch session where people get to ask the top executives questions, and one of the questions was "When did the 'sexual orientation' language get added to the employee handbook and why?" and the guy answered by reading out the text, that harrassment and intimidation of employees for reasons of race, sex, religion, national origin, or sexual orientation was not tolerated. Then he said, without malice or rancor, just very plainly spoke, that the reason that language was added was because people had been harrassed and intimidated for all those reasons, and no human being should be treated that way, that it was just despicable to think otherwise. He used the word "despicable". And then he sat down. I wanted to cheer.
I love that he didn't try to backpedal or soften the message at all for those who might disagree with it. I also love that he didn't invoke legal reasons or possible civil lawsuits. He just flat said it was wrong in no uncertain terms. I think I love the management of my company.
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
