posted
I was wondering if anyone had a censored text of Worthing Saga out there? Or maybe a list of skippable pages? I just bought a copy for a Rabbi-friend of mine and I know he wouldn't appreciate reading certain chapters.
Can anyone help me with this?
Posts: 1604 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
If I had a friend who would be scandalized by the mere mention of sex or defecation, I wouldn't give him a book that contained references to sex and defecation- in fact he would receive no books from me.
Edit: I take that back- I would give him copies of books he already owned.
posted
This kind of reminds me of when pooka said she refused to read OSC for many years because she thought it was filth. It just goes to show you...that OSC=pr0n.
Posts: 3354 | Registered: May 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Armoth: Thanks. Sometimes I think people get the message through parable rather than through intellectual arguments.
Rabbi Kirzner wrote the book while dealing with an extended and painful death from cancer. While there are intellectual aspects to it, that's far from the main thing I got from it.
Posts: 32919 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by lynda: I must have missed something in the Worthing Saga.
:spoilers:
Well, there's some humorous discussion of poop, both as an activity, and a food. There is also mention of the fun of withholding orgasm through telepathy. There are mentions and very generalized descriptions of a couple of orgies (I mean general to the point of saying who was involved). There is a very generalized mention of prostitution and arousal, mentions of adultery, a scene involving masturbation (again, only in general terms), a mention of the events of a wedding night, some hints at incestuous relationships, child abuse and molestation, and probably more I don't remember. OSC is always far from graphic- he only mentions the event if it is needed in the story.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
I think I may have read Worthing Chronicle( not Saga) Those scenes I would have remembered. I wonder if Worthing Chronicle would be the censored version you where looking for.... That is if you can still find it....
Posts: 26 | Registered: Aug 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
If you're really that worried, go through with a black marker and black out the swear words.
He's a Rabbi, though, if that's anything like being a priest, he probably hears far worse things every day.
Posts: 2222 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by scifibum: That's quite a catalog, Orincoro. Did you keep notes?
I tend to have a fairly good memory for what I've read. It wasn't until I had thought about it for a moment that I realized that Worthing Saga probably has more sex in it than most of OSC's other work.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Hearing something that you find objectionable in a context that you aren't able to control can be very different than inviting that same thing to be said.
That said, I think Worthing is worth the discomfort.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
If a rabbi is too fragile for reading a book, any book, I think he has probably chosen the wrong line of work. In order to be an effective spiritual leader you must be able to see into the dankest, darkest elements of human life and still be yourself, still have hope.
That being said, while Worthing is somewhat disturbing in places, it is really a good read, and almost everything is in context. You might have trouble getting it past a middle school PTA approval panel, but I wouldn't rate it as anything more than PG-13. (And there are probably quite a few middle schoolers more than mature enough to handle it.)
Posts: 1321 | Registered: Jun 2006
| IP: Logged |
posted
This might be a bit derailing, but the first thing that comes into my head when I think rabbi is not "spiritual leader". I just think of someone very learned in Jewish law, which is deffinately not the same thing.
Posts: 399 | Registered: Dec 2008
| IP: Logged |
posted
The Rabbi and I both subscribe to the same set of religious principles and laws - something I didn't quite subscribe to at the earlier point in my life when I first read the book. Hence, the initial nixing of the black marker idea.
There were sexually explicit scenes with Arran Handully, "Lifeloop" for anyone who remembers.
I caved and started reading the book, hoping that my unconscious memory will kick in and I will be able to black out most of the sex-stuff without having to read too much of it myself.
Posts: 1604 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
posted
It's been a long time since I read it, but my really vague recollection is that if you stick with the extended story that takes up the first half+ of the book, you'll miss on the more questionable stuff that comes up in the short stories section. I could be totally off on that though...
As a side note, even though I can't remember the character's names the story of the couple and the loving husband who was getting cheated on (I hesitate to give more details for fear of spoilers, I think that's enough for anyone whose read it, right?) always got me at least teary eyed when I read it. Heck it's getting me emotional right now just thinking about it. Kind of strange, I remember the details of what happened in the story pretty well, even some direct quotes, yet I can't remember a single name of anyone in the story!
posted
I remember the short story you are referring to. Didn't get there yet. You're right, that had me by the heartstrings.
You're also right about the no sex in the first chunk of the book. I'm over 100 pages through and nothing yet objectionable.
From my last time reading it, I remember some bad stuff with Adam Worthing, I remember him being kinda sick and twisted...
Posts: 1604 | Registered: Mar 2003
| IP: Logged |
quote:There were sexually explicit scenes with Arran Handully, "Lifeloop" for anyone who remembers.
Those were explicit? I remember there being sex scenes-- that was Arran's whole career-- but I don't remember them being explicit.
Posts: 14554 | Registered: Dec 1999
| IP: Logged |
posted
If you define "explicit" as mentioning that an orgy has occurred, then yes, the story is explicit.
But seriously, there is nothing explicit in the whole book- and "objectionable" is a strange thing to say about any content in a good book. I would only object if the book sucked. That would be objectionable.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Hobbes: As a side note, even though I can't remember the character's names the story of the couple and the loving husband who was getting cheated on (I hesitate to give more details for fear of spoilers, I think that's enough for anyone whose read it, right?) always got me at least teary eyed when I read it. Heck it's getting me emotional right now just thinking about it. Kind of strange, I remember the details of what happened in the story pretty well, even some direct quotes, yet I can't remember a single name of anyone in the story!
Funny, it's the same for me with the people from Capitol. I remember the main characters from the Worthing Chronicle, etc. but the ones that originally settled the planet Worthing and their kids somehow all blend together. Could it be because the names have a degree of similarity to them? I remember that bothering me a couple reads ago... *goes back to skim book*
I think this was written before OSC consciously started making his characters' names different from one another, because I know he's written about that before. I get that this society has certain naming traditions but...wow. Thank goodness all we have to worry about in the Ender books is Peter/Petra!
Posts: 973 | Registered: Apr 2005
| IP: Logged |
quote:Originally posted by Orincoro: "objectionable" is a strange thing to say about any content in a good book. I would only object if the book sucked. That would be objectionable.
Really? You don't think that a book can be well written but have objectionable content?
Posts: 571 | Registered: Mar 2001
| IP: Logged |
posted
No, in that I think a well written book contains nothing that doesn't fit well in the context of the book.
I was always taught as a composer, that a good measure of "completeness," and a good way to check my own work for weaknesses, was to imagine all the parts of the work that could be removed, and still have the work remain "the work." When the answer is "none," then the work is finished. That doesn't translate into "remove as many notes as possible," because you may want to create something that isn't spare in appearance, but what you don't want is a bunch of things that might be good ideas, but don't fit well into the work as a whole. You can approach every note as vital to the whole, and if a particular note sounds extraneous or extended, you need to justify, to yourself, why that note is important for the success of a work in total.
That is why censorship is damaging to any good, complete work of art. If a work can withstand censorship, then what is really going on is "editing," which is a needed process. You can never take a complete work, remove some parts, and call the result anything but less than the original. That's why I never, ever, listen to abridgments, or watch censored copies of anything if I can help it at all.
If a work is not right for a particular audience? Too bad. That work isn't right for them. Presenting something less than that work is damaging to it, and I think it represents a bad impulse. I don't think we should teach children that there is an acceptable veneer in which we can wrap the speech or art of others in order to spare ourselves the discomfort of its whole being. I'm not just saying this to be a purist for purism's sake- I have seen the subtle effects of this kind of thinking throughout my career as a composer, and I don't even deal much in the types of media that are most subject to worry over "profanity."
Discussions of censorship are partly aside from all this. The way a book is written, and the way someone talks on a live TV show or in front of your kids is something different. There are matters of respect and decorum to consider in different situations. But a book seeks an audience willing to read it. If you find the content of a good book to be objectionable, then I think we just disagree upon the quality of the book. 1984, by George Orwell, contains extremely violent and sexually charged imagery and sentiments, and it is a book read by American 10th graders. Why? Because those things fit in the book- it wouldn't *be* the book without them. That's why I railed so hard against OSC neutering his own work by removing the N-word from Ender's Game, after it had become a popular book- it's not much different from making a promise to someone, getting a reputation for honesty, and then lying in order to get what you really want. That change cheated everyone who reads the book out of what made it popular (albeit, in a collection of small ways). That's why Star Wars fans always remember that Han Shot First- because that's part of what made the character who he was.
That which is profane is ugly. Great art is not ugly.
posted
Isn't it a bit ironic (though it could be more so if we were talking directly about, for instance, 1984) to contemplate making The Worthing Saga more digestable to sensitive systems? This is, after all, a work that is both about the nature of storytelling and about the value of suffering. Removing discomfort is a big goal for a chunk of the characters in the book. And other characters excoriate them for it.
I just finished The Worthing Chronicle this morning for the first time. When I can handle it I'll move on to the rest of the Saga. The last few days I've been describing the novel as "a kick in the pants," but it's really more of a punch to the gut. I think it could end up being very important to me. I've done a lot of thinking about how suffering--one's own, others'--is processed, and about any given person's role in the world's growth.
As someone whose memories of the story are still fresh to the point of bleeding, I can say that at least the Chronicle contains some vulgarity, but not much by the standards of today; e.g. references to sex but no sex scenes. There's also a lot of violence, a lot of death, and (almost to the point of Douglas Adams's "very surprised whale" scene) suffering about which the audience is dang well meant to care. Like I said, a punch in the gut, but not a (metaphorical) slathering with dirt.
If I were concerned with how someone would take the story, I'd give him the book and say, "Look, this may not be your thing, but it also might be very valuable to you." And try to make it clear that's not meant as a challenge or as patronization.
Posts: 3 | Registered: Apr 2009
| IP: Logged |
quote:Isn't it a bit ironic (though it could be more so if we were talking directly about, for instance, 1984) to contemplate making The Worthing Saga more digestable to sensitive systems? This is, after all, a work that is both about the nature of storytelling and about the value of suffering. Removing discomfort is a big goal for a chunk of the characters in the book. And other characters excoriate them for it.
This is a very good point.
quote:If I were concerned with how someone would take the story, I'd give him the book and say, "Look, this may not be your thing, but it also might be very valuable to you." And try to make it clear that's not meant as a challenge or as patronization.
You could even say "this is valuable to me, and this is why. I thought you might like to read it."
It does seem a little weird to me to try to protect the rabbi's sensibilities through censorship, but I suppose it would be like recommending a movie that contains a sex scene to someone who objects to all such imagery: you might feel better if you could suggest they watch the edited version airing on basic cable. (But to Jinnayah's point: how do you get as much value from a story about the human condition if you paint over all the flaws?)
Posts: 4287 | Registered: Mar 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
Scifi- I think that's the unfortunate nature of our corporate media and the marketplace right now. It is always feared first that vulgarity and discomfort will overwhelm and overly tax the senses, so it is controlled to the point of limiting one's ability to produce effective art. Really though, censorship is just a control against bad art- there is no good art which is vulgar, value is antithetical to vulgarity. I tend to think that virtually anything, properly portrayed, could be examined by a capable enough artist. But the scale of difficult rises proportionately to the level of detail and verisimilitude, the level of truth, that the artist aspires to.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
posted
But at some point down the line, a lot of those scripts, or at least what eventually becomes the shooting script and the final cut of a movie starts out in someone's head or on paper as a piece of art. And Hollywood certainly produces a fair number of masterpieces, given its actual output.
When you compare the batting average from Hollywood against the batting average of virtually any other medium, you'll probably find its as high or higher than most- and I mean that knowing that perhaps one or two, and often no films are produced in any given year that will last, say, a century in the popular imagination. There might be only one every ten years, but that's actually not that bad.
Posts: 9912 | Registered: Nov 2005
| IP: Logged |
Printer-friendly view of this topic
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
![[ROFL]](graemlins/rofl.gif)
![[Laugh]](graemlins/laugh.gif)
![[Eek!]](eek.gif)
