message 0047

• Gender roles in C.J. Cherryh's writing; incl. Azi and aliens (huge thread!)
• "Why I like C.J. Cherryh's books"

>Date: Wed, 2 Dec 92 12:14:35 -0800
>From: rcrowley@zso.dec.com (Rebecca Leann Smit Crowley)
>Subject: cherryhlist


I haven't been reading the Net long enough to have encountered much
of this reaction to Cherryh (which is in no way to suggest that it
doesn't occur!), nor have I read as much Cherryh as some on this list
have -- I started with the Chanur series, and have been slowly working
my way through the rest of her sf, but  I haven't got to _Downbelow
Station_ or _40,000 in Gehenna_.  If I were to describe why I like
Cherryh, it would probably be for a combination of three reasons:
I like the characterization (especially the relatively high proportion
of strong females, something I miss in a lot of sf), I like the tension
and suspense generated by putting volatile characters in volatile 
situations and having the outcome depend on how conflicts of loyalty
work out, and I like some of the philosophical stuff she plays with
on occasion (most notably _Wave Without a Shore_).

When I read Lesley's original post, I immediately thought of all the
arguments I've heard and read on the subject of Heinlein's characters
(especially women), described variously:  sometimes he's accused of
all his characters being "alike", the "same person, at different stages
of life", and the women are often described as "unrealistic".  Yet
I have no difficulty telling Jubal Harshaw and Lazarus Long apart,
and Maureen and Hazel and Sharpie are all women I both identify with,
and I can see uncanny resemblances between them and a few of
my friends (pity it's not more!).  I think what happens with Cherryh
is similar:  the style, the authorial stamp, the philosophical
and psychological underpinnings of her novels are distinctly unique.
If that turns someone "off", they are unable to see beyond it to the
rich texture of humanity (uh, wrong word, don't know what to use 
instead, tho) that exists in that context.  It all becomes the "same", 
because it is for them the sameness of everyone reflected in a funhouse 
mirror.  Until you get used to looking in that mirror, you cannot tell 
a friend from a stranger, much less recognize that this stranger is 
someone you met in passing a year ago at a party.

>What is it about
>the other male characters that arouses irritation in some readers?

So I think that it isn't anything about the characters per se, but
rather the style as a whole, the way that Cherryh portrays sentients
of various species and worlds, that irritates some.  And it just
completely misses some people, too.  I remember lending a copy of
_Merchanter's Luck_ to my younger sister, and asking her later what
she thought of it.  All the suspense I got out of the book just escaped
her;  as far as she was concerned, it was an entertaining
action-adventure.

>You could probably have a conversation with
>most of Cherryh's male characters -- something it's difficult to imagine
>with some other author's creations.

I agree completely.  You might not be able to trust many of Cherryh's
characters (male or female), but you could certainly have fascinating
conversations with them.

				Rebecca