Re: (review) Trash, Sex, Magic by Jennifer Stevenson

On 13 Jun 2024 13:03:52 -0000, jdnicoll@panix.com (James Nicoll)
wrote:

Trash, Sex, Magic by Jennifer Stevenson
>
The local river guardian having perished at developer hands, Rae Somershoe
and her kin know it is only a matter of time before the Fox River jumps
its banks... unless a bold solution is embraced.
>
https://jamesdavisnicoll.com/review/river-dont-rise

Your review displays a profound misunderstanding of the process by
which novels are assigned to genres.
Whether this novel is fantasy or horror (I presume it is the former)
does not depend on the _reader_... it depends on who is the
protagonist, who is the viewpoint character, how sympathetic the
author has chosen to make the various characters, and so on.

I know, I'm being ironic here, by deliberately ignoring your attempt
at irony. You make a very valid point - that the author has, perhaps,
slipped up by having her sympathetic characters seek to protect their
land from the nasty old developers... by doing something generally
regarded as highly reprehensible.
On the one hand, though, the proposed victim is on his way to aid and
abet the nasty old developers.
And on the other, the needs of gods and river guardians take
precedence over human "rights"; why, we can cite the Book of Job as
authority here!
So the book isn't rendered unreadable by the lack of a moral theory by
which to make it intelligible, at least to some readers.

In fact, I remember reading a novel in the 70s or 80s about a young
Native American man who kidnaps a young woman... of whom he is going
to make a human sacrifice, in order to balance the immense karma of
all the terrible things the European invaders did to Native Americans.
Because if he doesn't, the karma will be balanced by natural disasters
that will kill far more than _one_ white American.
He manages to convince his victim of the necessity of his plan, so she
supports him while he is pursued by the police, the basic situation of
most of the novel.

I recount this lengthy description of an old book, which may be called
a YASID if you like, to show... that this book has at least one
_precedent_.
Some authors like challenging our moral assumptions.
The alternative - the opposite kind of work - might be a work of
mil-sf which reassures its readers that what Israel is doing in Gaza
of late is perfectly moral and reasonable as a response to terrorism.
So while challenging our moral outlook in order to move us to more
sympathy for the marginalized and downtrodden... can produce
monstrosities, so can confirming a moral outlook that lets us ignore
the marginalized and downtrodden.

Putting my personal politics aside, which, despite my distaste for
Trump, actually tend to the conservative in many respects, my point
therfore is: you're right to criticize this author, but it would be
wrong to unreservedly condemn her. There's a context going on here.

John Savard