Nice review! And a -smart- review, too, I think.
I was particularly gratified that I'd gotten the Midwestern autumn right. It's always been my favorite time of year.
Thanks Dale. By happenstance, I just finished The Scourge of God this afternoon and will be downloading Sword to my Kindle as soon as conveniently possible.
Oh, and thanks, too, Steve, for, uh, writing the books. 
Dear Dale:
I read your review of S.M. Stirling's THE SWORD OF THE LADY with great interest. And I caught the personal references to me (smiles). Many thanks!
I agree with you that Stirling presented the malignant, supernatural evil of the CUT very convincingly. As well as showing how individual CUTists could still be quite decent men. Like Peter Graber and even Rancher Smith.
Yes, I did find the "pluralism" unconvincing. As an uncompromising Trinitarian monotheist and Catholic, I deny other gods exist. But, I agree we cannot expect a non Catholic to always agree with us. Thus, I accept how Mr. Stirling wrote SWORD.
However, I do have a strong objection to how he depicted the Aesirtru neo-Norse in what used to be Maine. Frankly, I found the Aesirtru implausibly NICE. And the depiction of the renewed worship of the old Norse gods did not ring true. Anyone who has read the Elder Edda and various of the Norse sagas will recall how cruel, tricky, and treacherous the Norse gods could be. And no mention was made of how Odin received HUMAN sacrifices.
I'm reminded of this bit from Poul Anderson's Foreword to his HROLF KRAKI'S SAGA (1973): "Here is no LORD OF THE RINGS, work of a civilized, Christian author--though probably it was one of Tolkien's many wellsprings. Hrolf Kraki lived in the midnight of the Dark Ages. Slaughter, slavery, robbery, rape, torture, heathen rites blood or obscene--were parts of daily life. Finns in particular will note the brutality and superstition to which the Scandinavians subjected their harmless people. Love, loyalty, honesty beyond the most nigging technicalities, were only for one's kindred, chieftain, and closest friends. The rest of mankind were foemen or prey. And often anger and treachery broke what bonds there were."
In the agony and chaos following the Change, is it really PLAUSIBLE that a neo pagan attempt at founding a "Norse" culture would NOT show any of these evils? But, then, I believe in Original Sin and am not surprised when people behave badly.
Another fairly serious criticism I have is the implausible vision Rudi had at Nantucket Island. I did not find it CONVINCING that whoever the Powers he met there were, they appeared to him as Junie MacKenzie, Swindapa, and Marian Alston. Also, I'm uneasy at the hint (I might be wrong, tho)the good Powers brought on something as ghastly and horrible as the Change.
But I don't want to end my comments on THE SWORD OF THE LADY so negatively. I kept being reminded of how Stirling's descriptions of backgrounds and nature reminded me of Poul Anderson's descriptive skills.
Sincerely,
Sean:
Good points on the Norse. I think I can anticipate the response, though. What the Changelings have done is not re-create the actual emulated cultures, but rather have created an idealized, heavily-romanticized version of those cultures. Norman feudalism was nowhere near as courtly and cultured as is practiced by the current PPA. Instead, the PPA created a Sir Walter Scott-ish storybook version of it, albeit with the usual problems caused by original sin. Knights could be a thoroughly nasty bunch by our standards--and our standards soften and transform the post-Change reality. Ditto Scottish clan life and its feuds, which are essentially absent from the bucolic life of the Mackenzies.
The Change fell upon 20th Century civilized Americans, and they couldn't live exactly like their chosen models even if they had wanted to. For the most part (exceptions like Norman Arminger), they didn't want to. To their credit, they preferred a mythic version.
If he did one about England, instead of N. America, I'd buy it and read it. I bought one of them and it started in England and it was great. Then I lost interest. Sorry.
Dear Dale:
Thans for replying to me. I agree you made a good point tbat the PPA, neo Norse Aesirtru, MacKenzies, etc., were influenced by the more idealized or romantic visions tbey had of their models when founding post Change societies. But, our rotten human nature being what it is, I have my doubts that, say, the Aesirtru, would have LONG stayed true to this ideal. I'm quite sure evils like slavery and sacrifices of humans to the Norse gods would soon have appeared.
Why? Because, IMO, these civilized post Change survivors would have been drawing on the Christian "moral capital" their original society was based on. How LONG would many of the decencies we now take for granted LAST if people no longer had faith in the one and only God?
And that is why I think the future, ultimately, would lie with the PPA and other societies which had NOT rejected Christianity. I'm also reminded, I think in THE SUNRISE LANDS, of how Fr. Ignatius reflected that his talents were not those of a missionay. He was thinking of how the Church was making plans to begin missions among the MacKenzies. Which brings up obvious plot possibilities of the debate and strife between Wiccans and Christians which would soon begin.
Hilary, you might like S.M. Stirling's THE PESHAWAR LANCERS better. That book is set in a world devastated by comets strking the Earth in the 1870s. Bringing on utter chaos in the Northern Hemisphere. The British court and gov't fled to India.
Sincerely,
What the Changelings have done is not re-create the actual emulated cultures, but rather have created an idealized, heavily-romanticized version of those cultures.
-- yeah, pretty much. As is frequently pointed out, these aren't replicas of any actual past society. There are points of (deliberate) resemblance, but also large differences.
"Ditto Scottish clan life and its feuds, which are essentially absent from the bucolic life of the Mackenzies."
-- to be fair, there's only -one clan- in the Mackenzie system.
(Strictly speaking there's only one big clan. There are several imitators further south in former Oregon, known to the Mackenzies as "the Clan Wannabee".)
"How LONG would many of the decencies we now take for granted LAST if people no longer had faith in the one and only God?"
-- well, that would depend on what they -did- have faith in; that is, what they thought their Gods demanded of them in the way of moral imperatives.
Various types of neopaganism differ sharply on this.
The Asatruar have a definite set of moral precepts, with a rather "sterner" flavor than, say, Wicca: the emphasis is on honor, truthfulness, steadfastness, and virtues like hospitality and self-reliance.
(The Gods are seen as often traveling in disguise to test how strangers are treated, for example.)
And of course there would be evolution and change in the post-Change setting, where some of them become dominant.
"Yes, I did find the "pluralism" unconvincing. As an uncompromising Trinitarian monotheist and Catholic, I deny other gods exist."
-- actually, that's fully compatible with the "visions" presented in THE SWORD OF THE LADY.
I cribbed heavily from C.S. Lewis there, among others... 8-).
Dear Mr. Stirling:
I'm sorry if I sounded rather too critical of THE SWORD OF THE LADY. I should have stressed in my comments how much I enjoyed this and the previous Changeverse books.
The MacKenzies I found rather too implausibly "bucolic" (to use Dale's word). And you commented that it was actually one big clan, rather than several. So that would eliminate one reason for the often bloody rivalries, factions, and feuds which so often marred Scottish/Irish history. But, in that case, human nature being what it is, strife and quarrels would, IMO, have soon arisen from AMONG the MacKenzies themselves.
I laid more stress in my previous comments on the neo paganism of the Aesirtru than I did on the MacKenzie Wiccans for a reason. We know MORE about Scandinavian paganism than we do about the "Celtic" neo paganism many modern Wiccans claim to imiitate. Actually, what we today among "Celtic" Wiccans has been mostly cobbled together from modern sources. The Eddas and the sagas tell us quite a lot about pre Christian Scandinavian religion.
I agree with all the virtues you listed as being stressed by Aesirtrua like honor, steadfastness, truthfulness, and hospitality. But I can find all or very similar ideas being taught in the Gospels and the Letters of St. Paul. What I find lacking in all forms of paganism are the THEOLOGICAL virtues of faith, hope, and charity ("caritas" might be a better word, tho). To say nothing, of course, of how I don't believe Odin, Thor, the Wiccan "Lady," etc., exists.
It's interesting you have been reading C.S. Lewis. That would explain the not quite Catholic "take" on Christianity I've noticed in your books. Let me hasten to add I'm NOT offended by this! Do you read any Catholic apologetic works? G.K. Chesterton's THE EVERLASTING MAN came to mind because of his discussion of paganism in that book.
Sincerely,
Well, not having read any of the books, I can't comment on the content, but I would just like to interpose here about pagan prophesy and Christianity.
There is the mediaeval tradition of including the Sibyls as prophetesses for the Gentiles, foretelling the advent of the true God to come. That's why they are painted on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel, after all
This goes along with treating Virgil as a virtuous Pagan, whose fourth Ecolgue was seen as containing a prophecy of Christ's birth:
"Now the last age by Cumae's Sibyl sung
Has come and gone, and the majestic roll
Of circling centuries begins anew:
Justice returns, returns old Saturn's reign,
With a new breed of men sent down from heaven.
Only do thou, at the boy's birth in whom
The iron shall cease, the golden race arise,
Befriend him, chaste Lucina; 'tis thine own
Apollo reigns. And in thy consulate,
This glorious age, O Pollio, shall begin,
And the months enter on their mighty march.
Under thy guidance, whatso tracks remain
Of our old wickedness, once done away,
Shall free the earth from never-ceasing fear."
A chunk of quotation on the topic from Wikipedia:
"Christians were especially impressed with the Cumaean Sibyl, for in Virgil's Fourth Eclogue she foretells the coming of a savior - possibly a flattering reference to the poet's patron - whom Christians identified as Jesus...The medieval, Christianized role for these augmented Sibyls was as precursors, prophets of the New Dispensation, Christian allies in a Hellenistic world:
Dies irae, dies illa
Solvet saeclum in favilla
Teste David cum Sibylla.
("Day of wrath, that day, when the world will dissolve in ashes, as have foretold David and the Sibyl.")
In the Middle Ages the number of Sibyls was canonized as twelve, a symbolic number...Late Gothic Sibyls, each with her emblem and a single line of prophecy, lettered on a fluttering banderole, were fixtures of Late Gothic illuminations, in 14th and 15th-century France and Germany.
From the early Renaissance, the Sibyls were also represented in publicly available art. Michelangelo fixed our image of the sibyls forever, in his powerful representations of them, seated, both aged and ageless, beyond mere femininity, in the frescos of the Sistine Chapel. Five sibyls were painted on the Sistine Chapel ceiling by Michelangelo; the Delphic Sibyl, Libyan Sibyl, Persian Sibyl, Cumaean Sibyl and the Erythraean Sibyl. The library of Pope Julius II in the Vatican has images of sibyls and they are in the pavement of the Siena Cathedral. The Basilica of Santa Maria in Aracoeli crowning the Campidoglio, Rome, is particularly associated with the Sibyl, because a medieval tradition referred the origin of its name to an otherwise unattested altar, ARA PRIMOGENITI DEI said to have been raised to the "firstborn of God" by the emperor Augustus, who had been warned of his advent by the sibylline books: in the church the fig
All that long post beforehand is just to say that there is certainly precedent for treating pagan seers and prophets as having had true visions
I would agree that modern recreations of Viking culture are probably a lot less bloody both politically and theologically; then again, there is precedent historically for alliances between pagan and Christian.
For example, the Battle of Clontarf (very famous in Irish history as breaking the power of the Vikings in Ireland) had a mixture of Christian and pagan on *both* sides: Sitric Silkbeard, the king of Dublin, was himself Christian but called on his pagan relations and allies from the Isle of Man and the Orkneys, with the King of Leinter against Brian Boru, who had allies from the recently- and still-pagan Danes of my own city, Waterford, with him (they only became Christian in this century), as well as both sides having hired mercenaries, and a fair amount of savagery and double-dealing by both parties.
What I remember from history class when I was eleven was the story of how Brodir who killed Brian was himself killed: Sr. Joseph (our teacher) told us that it was done by the Dal gCáis bodyguard, but Wikipedia claims it was Wolf the Quarrelsome; however, they both agree that he was tied to a tree - using his own entrails for rope (this went down surprisingly well with a class of eleven year old girls!) 
"Wolf the Quarrelsome is described in Njals Saga as a brother (or sometimes identified as stepson) to Brian Boru, High King of Ireland from 1002 to 1014. He is primarily mentioned in Njals saga's account of the Battle of Clontarf of 1014, in the aftermath of which he gruesomely killed Brodir of the Isle of Man to avenge his brother's death at the hands of the invaders:
'Wolf the Quarrelsome cut open his belly, and led him round and round the trunk of a tree, and so wound all his entrails out of him, and he did not die before they were all drawn out of him.'
Some have identified Wolf as a brother of Brian named Cuiduligh. There is no historical evidence from the annals that Wolf is anything more than a fictional figure from Njals saga."
Dear Fuinseoig:
I read your notes with interest. I too have read of how Virgil's Fourth Eclogue was thought by many early Christians as referring to the coming of Christ. Which explains why the Sibyls had an honored place or role in Christian art and literature.
More prosaically, I think Virgil was making a flattering allusion to the birth of Augustus. Many Romans of that time were grateful for the peace Augustus had brought to Rome's Empire after decades of instability and civil wars in the Late Republic.
And I hope you do try reading S.M. Stirling's books. Considering what some of us had been discussing, I would suggest starting with DIES THE FIRE. Or a stand alone novel like THE PESHAWAR LANCERS would be a good start. Or one of the books of my most favorite of SF writers, Poul Anderson.
Sincerely,
"The Eddas and the sagas tell us quite a lot about pre Christian Scandinavian religion."
-- though they were all written down by Christians and long after paganism had ceased to be practiced except at the folk-magic level.
"It's interesting you have been reading C.S. Lewis."
-- started when I was about 6, in fact.
"G.K. Chesterton's THE EVERLASTING MAN came to mind because of his discussion of paganism in that book."
-- I've read all Chesterton's work, I think; in fact, I had by my early 20's.
A brilliant man, but given to talking about things he didn't understand. (He's utterly obtuse about economics, for example, but he -would- persist in writing about it.)
Dear Mr. Stirling:
Thanks for your reply! Yes, I agree the Eddas and Sagas were written AFTER the Danes, Norse, and Icelanders converted (Sweden became Catholic some what later). And by the time that happened, memories of the pre Christian paganism had become somewhat confused and disordered. But what I had in mind was that we still know MORE about Scandinavian paganism than the Celtic kind.
I've read a lot of CS Lewis, but not everything! THE SCREWTAPE LETTERS, THE GREAT DIVORCE, MERE CHRISTIANITY, his "Space Trilogy," are what comes most easily to mind.
Wow! And Chesterton was even more PROLIFIC a writer than Lewis was. I do agree GKC could be wrong on some matters. Poul Anderson mentioned in one of his letters how he disagreed with Chesterton about the Jews. BUT, PA hastened to point out Chesterton was NEVER vicious about the Jews and would have been horrified by Hitler's genocide.
But, I do think GKC was right, or at least arguably close to being right on matters OTHER than economics and the Jews. Which is why I thought of his comments about paganism in THE EVERLASTING MAN.
And I do look forward to reading your next Changeverse book!
Sincerely,
Stirling said:
-- I've read all Chesterton's work, I think; in fact, I had by my early 20's.
Ouch! There's a lot of good writing there, but there's also a lot of junk; or, perhaps rather, writing that served its narrow purposes at the time but is little more than fossilized apologetics now.
You've read all of his distributivist literature? You didn't find some of it a bit repetitive and unnecessary?
There's also a lot of journalistic writing for various newspapers that hasn't been collected until very recently I believe.
I can understand your completist drive though...
Me? I'm still more than a bit testy that I haven't been able to find a complete collection of George Orwell's anonymous film criticism...
Everything else, I've read.
Sean M Brooks:
Your comments about Scandavian paganism is very interesting. It's exactly like Islam. I wonder if the characterization of Islam as a monotheistic paganism isn't accurate.
S.M. Stirling:
I agree with you about Chesterton's economics. The Distribitivists look for a solution that no longer exists due to computerized inventory and the just in time manufacturing system.
xavier
Dear xavier:
Thanks for your comments. Interesting, I never thought of Scandinavian paganism as being like Islam. They might share some similarities in what I could call "practical" ethics. That is, the stress the Eddas lay on honor, steadfastness, hospitality, etc., can be found at least in the personal code of behavior of some Muslims. And it is true that Mohammed took over from Arabian paganism some laws and customs.
However, I would not call Islam FRIENDLY to, or tolerant of paganism. The Koran is even more hostile to pagans that it is to Jews and Christians who refuse to voluntarily "submit" to Islam.
In addition, I don't like how Islam
believes, at leat as an ideal, in the MERGING of mosque and state. That kind of theocratic quasi totalitarianism inevitably leads to the oppression of stubborn non conformists who refuse to "submit" to Islam. Think of substituting Islam for the CUT!
Sincerely,
Dale,
In the books, does magic re-appear, at least in part, because the laws of physics have changed?
"In the books, does magic re-appear, at least in part, because the laws of physics have changed?"
-- Clarke's Law... 8-).
Hi, Secret Agent:
No, what we see in the DIES THE FIRE series is not really magic. Sometimes good guys like Fr. Ignatius are given encouraging or informative visions, but no POWERS. Those who fight on the side of good are expected to do the best they can using their own brains and courage.
BUT, the theosophist gnostic diabolist adepts of the Church Universal and Triumphant are clearly using powers not natural to man. The CUT adepts can, when possessed by the Dark Lord, take possession of both living men and temporarily reanimate the bodies of the dead. And I think these adepts can "see" over long distances as well.
Sincerely,
Thanks Sean. I guess I was wondering if the CUT people can do these things because the laws of physics have changed somehow. Like Niven's The Magic Goes Away, but in reverse.
So, the usual question: what did people like, what didn't they like (and why to both), and what scenes were particularly striking?
Steve,
Favorite bits:
Definitely the battle in Iowa with the High Seeker!
Rudy and Matilda's tension rang true for me.
Jake sunna Jake and the other Southsiders.
Peter Graber is a great "if only he were one of the good guys" opponent. (I am distantly related to some Grabers...)
The demise of the mentioned perspective character was well done.
Disappointments:
Not seeing more of Michigan! (I suppose that leaves room for Emberverse fanfic...)
Either I was rushed/tired at the end, or you were, because something wasn't quite clicking for me with the neo-Norse. That might bear re-reading on my part, though...
The specific persons of the three ladies seemed... indulgent. Like late Heinlein. Sorry.
How's that?
peace,
Zach
Steve Stirling said:
"In the books, does magic re-appear, at least in part, because the laws of physics have changed?"
-- Clarke's Law... 8-).
The difference here is that I think Clarke was referring to the fact (as an example) Newton was ignorant of 20th century century physics and so couldn't understand the integrated circuit.
This is due mostly to historical circumstance and hence is of a lower order of impossibility.
Had Newton received a crash course in 20th century physics and technology, he probably could have understood it. It wasn't a physical impossibility.
Whereas, for a dog to understand the probabilistic nature of subatomic physics is almost certainly a categorical impossibility.
It doesn't matter how much obedience school my dog attends, she's never going to be a quantum physicist.
Thus, Clarke would seem to be describing historical determinism.
The magic in the Emberverse, on the other hand, is for humans at a higher order of impossibility, and is reflective of the school of thought often labeled as New Mysterianism or Cognitive Closure.
This, although certainly a possibility in a rational mechanistic universe, seems to be at odds with much of the philosophical background and belief-structure that was responsible for the scientific revolution.
A rather whiggish philosophical system which argued that the universe was uniform, rational, comprehensible, and, perhaps more importantly, capable of being verified and understood by humans through the scientific method.
Thus, the Emberverse series, though firmly rooted in a rational universe seems to play with the idea of what if the universe, though rational and scientific, is transcendent?
Possibly anti-science science fiction?
Just my opinion as food for thought, and one of the things I love about the series.
Steve & Myles,
Many thanks. You just sold one book.
Dear Mr. Stirling:
I won't repeat my carping comments about the neo Norse or why I didn't find Rudi's vision at Nantucket quite satisfactory. I do want to stress THE SWORD OF THE LADY gave me great pleasure.
I do regret how Odard Liu died, tho. He was getting to be a very interesting and well developed character. I might have preferred either Mary or Ritva Havel getting knocked off. After all, they are IDENTICAL twins! (Smiles)
And I liked how complex you made the relationship between Rudi and Mathilda is. No cheap, easy boy meets girl--boy and girl immediately have sex--cliche there!
I did find Rudi's bafflment at Mathilda's refusal to hop into bed with him a bit unconvicing. After all, for years, he had been spending three months a year as a hostage/guest in the mostly Catholic PPA. So, it seems reasonable Rudi would at least KNOW of the Christian belief that sex is best left to married persons (and I know quite well how often we Christians fail to live up to our standards).
Sincerely,
"Thus, the Emberverse series, though firmly rooted in a rational universe seems to play with the idea of what if the universe, though rational and scientific, is transcendent?
Possibly anti-science science fiction?"
-- not anti-science, but perhaps anti-a-certain-concept-of-science.
The self-confident Whiggery you mention was a product of the Newtonian/Enlightenment moment, before it had been discovered (or sunk in) how big, how old, how weird the universe was, and how strange we ourselves were.
Note how even Einstein had trouble accepting the implications of quantum mechanics -- hence his famous statement about "God does not play dice with the world", which led Bohr to snap at him: "Albert, stop trying to tell God what he can and cannot do!"
And things have gotten stranger since: It's now hypothesized quite seriously that the CERN keeps breaking down becase its future is affecting its past, for example.
"I've read a lot of CS Lewis, but not everything! THE SCREWTAPE LETTERS, THE GREAT DIVORCE, MERE CHRISTIANITY, his "Space Trilogy," are what comes most easily to mind."
-- his literary cricitism is worth reading, as are a number of his stories dealing with the nature of myth.
And "A Grief Observed" is extremely moving.
I've always been tickled by his comment on why he didn't deal with the rampant homosexuality at his school when writing about the place. He replied that he only analyzed sins to which he was actually tempted.
Sean,
I read Rudi as not being surprised that Matti will wait until marriage (he's well aware of that), but that Matti would agree to marry him but insist that their marriage not occur until their return to Montival. Especially with a priest handy!
That's where she surprises (and frustrates!) him. Perhaps he shouldn't have been surprised, in which case I think we can blame his, ah, eagerness.
peace,
Zach
Steve Stirling said:
-- not anti-science, but perhaps anti-a-certain-concept-of-science.
True enough. Godel's incompleteness theorems are generally undisputed, Penrose is a well-accepted authority, and I don't know many astrophysicists who will pretend that they will ever have any clue as to what the universe was like 10^-14 seconds after the big bang and earlier.
The best evidence indicates that the best evidence wont help us a bit in discovering the answer to that one.
This certainly isn't a new theme in your work. Notice the parable of pride embodied in the Draka's belief that they are fully capable of understanding the mechanistic origins of human creativity and inspiration. Of course, in trying to physically replicate and tamper with this, they end up forever lacking that 1% spark, and have to rely more and more on weak imperfect humans.
Hi, Zach! Thanks for your note.
Ha! Amusing, the point you made that Fr. Ignatius could have witnessed the marriage of Rudi and Mathilda either among the neo Norse communities or even on Nantucket. I completely forgot about Fr. Ignatius.
Perhaps Mathilda was thinking it would be politically better or more prudent for them to marry back home, with plenty of witnesses from both the PPA and the Mackenzies. A bit unlikely, perhaps, since I'm sure no one would honestly doubt Fr. Ignatius could validly witness the marriage of Mathilda and Rudi.
Comments beginning here are meant for Mr. Stirling. I've been wondering if you had "rushed" the alliance of the CUT with the usurping and parricidal President Martin Thurston of the "United States" of Boise too hastily. That is, wouldn't it have made more sense for the CUT Prophet Sethaz to pause after conquering the Mormon state of Deseret? A few years pause to firmly integrate the conquered territories into the CUT seems to make sense.
Also, covertly intriguing with Martin Thurston to help him seize power in Boise and then for the two powers to attack the Willamette valley states has risks. An outside attack like that would be a perfect cause to make the PPA, Bearkillers, Mackenzies, Mt. Angel, Corvallis, CORA, etc., forget mutual jealousies and rivalries and unite against the Corwin/Boise attack. It would be the seed of the projected kingdom of Montival ruled by Rudi and Mathilda.
Far better, IMO, for the CUT to have refrained from moving further west after conquering Deseret. Sethaz could have tried moving south, instead. Or even tried to overrun the neo Sioux. That would have lulled the less far sighted in the Willamette states from taking the CUT seriously--until it was too late!
A few years pause from further western campaigns would have allowed Sethaz to continue building up and training his forces. And he could have concentrated on trying to get an ally beholden to him into power in Boise. And ally he could hope to turn into a puppet.
Sincerely,
Dear Mr. Stirling:
Thanks for your comments to me about CS Lewis. I agree, I should read more of of Lewis' stuff. Examples you mentioned being his literary criticism and A GRIEF OBSERVED. I do have other works of his like THE FOUR LOVES.
One writer I can admit to being obsessed about is the late Poul Anderson. PA has deeply and strongly affected my mind and imagination ever since I first read AGENT OF THE TERRAN EMPIRE in either 1968 or 1969.
Poul Anderson's "Technic Civlization" series and the "HARVEST THE FIRE" books are examples of his works which has deeply affected me. To say nothing of stand alone works like THE BROKEN SWORD, THREE HEARTS AND THREE LIONS, TAU ZERO, GENESIS, etc.
Mind, I didn't quite agree with everything PA believed. He was inclined to libertarianism while I'm a conservative. But that's more a matter of disagreeing in merely DEGREE. After all, we both agreed on the necessity of putting strict limits on the ability of human beings to abuse the powers of the state.
Also, I'm sorry Poul Anderson was inclined to be agnostic, rather than professing faith in God. BUT, some of his later short stories do make me wonder about THAT. Plus, Anderson was always respectful of the Catholic Church.
Sincerely,
My favorite bit was Mathilda's rationale for not agreeing to a marriage on the road-- not wanting to rely on NFP under such harsh conditions (a realistic concern when basics like food and sleep are not guaranteed to be in sufficient quantities or on regular timetables) and not wanting to be pregnant, and possibly even delivering under said conditions. Because honestly, I was thinking the same thing-- Rudi, you dork, BABIES? You ready for babies RIGHT NOW? Really?!??
All in all a fun read. I also really enjoyed the part when those cheeky young upstarts took it upon themselves to hail Artos the High King of Montival (even though none of the lot of them actually had the authority to do so, strictly speaking.) Rudi and Fr. Ignatius' battle with the CUT baddie was just palpable-- great writing. I could see and feel the whole thing playing out in front of me. Lastly, I don't have the book in front of me and can't remember her name, but the neo Norse young lady who found out she'd lost her fiance reminded me of Eowyn. Not quite sure why, but there you have it.
Thanks for another exciting, entertaining and thought-provoking entry in the saga, Mr. Stirling!
Hi, Margaret!
I should have thought of that point you raised on why Mathilda resisted a too early marriage with Rudi: the high chance of having a baby in the middle of a VERY dangerous journey. When Rudi and his fellow Questers have to plan on the LONG journey back to the Willamette states, things like barbarians, Eaters, and fanatical Cutters hell bent on slitting your throat have to be taken into account. NOT a good time for Mathilda to be pregnant and having a baby. She's right, marriage HAS to wait till if and when they get back home.
Amd just how will Rudi and the Questers get home? Will they try a more southerly land route? Or even a possibly safer if very long journey by sea south and thru the straits of Magellan?
Sincerely,
Most memorable bit for me: Father Ignatius invoking angelic protection in his battle with the CUT bad guys.
Commenting by HaloScan
