Talk:The Left Hand of Darkness: Difference between revisions
No edit summary |
|||
| Line 5: | Line 5: | ||
Several paragraphs of this article are straight copies from the Scifi.com review that it also links to ( http://www.scifi.com/sfw/issue116/classic.html ). I think the article (and the book) deserves better than this, although if a review is underway I'm sure it'll be addressed soon. I think more analysis of the concepts and content (and messages?) of the book would be welcome, though I'm terrible at such things myself. --[[User:StoneColdCrazy|StoneColdCrazy]] 17:59, 31 July 2006 (UTC) |
Several paragraphs of this article are straight copies from the Scifi.com review that it also links to ( http://www.scifi.com/sfw/issue116/classic.html ). I think the article (and the book) deserves better than this, although if a review is underway I'm sure it'll be addressed soon. I think more analysis of the concepts and content (and messages?) of the book would be welcome, though I'm terrible at such things myself. --[[User:StoneColdCrazy|StoneColdCrazy]] 17:59, 31 July 2006 (UTC) |
||
:I've verified the copyright violation and removed the material, which was added all in one edit. [[User:Justin Johnson|Justin Johnson]] 04:28, 1 August 2006 (UTC) |
|||
=== Mary Sue Comment === |
=== Mary Sue Comment === |
||
Revision as of 04:28, 1 August 2006
 | Novels Unassessed | |||||||||
| ||||||||||
Copyright violation?
Several paragraphs of this article are straight copies from the Scifi.com review that it also links to ( http://www.scifi.com/sfw/issue116/classic.html ). I think the article (and the book) deserves better than this, although if a review is underway I'm sure it'll be addressed soon. I think more analysis of the concepts and content (and messages?) of the book would be welcome, though I'm terrible at such things myself. --StoneColdCrazy 17:59, 31 July 2006 (UTC)
- I've verified the copyright violation and removed the material, which was added all in one edit. Justin Johnson 04:28, 1 August 2006 (UTC)
Mary Sue Comment
I've removed the following addition:
- Teresa Nielsen Hayden and Joanna Russ have noted that the novel can be considered a form of Mary Sue fiction.
I don't necessarily disagree with it (though I don't see how they two could say that). The problem is that it's an opaque criticism: The line as included says only that TNH and JR claim this, not why or how they claim this.
If you're going to add this line, please include either a brief exposition of the parallels between LHOD and Mary Sue-ism in fiction, or link to the arguments presented by TNH and JR. Without that, it's really just a meaningless slap at le Guin. JJ 22:30, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
- Having read the THN article linked in the Mary Sue article, I'm still not convinced the content should be added, since in THN's blog entry, the entirety of LHOD's mention is:
- I, considering it, said “Which is not to say that The Left Hand of Darkness is a specimen of Star Trek slash fiction.” Joanna's jaw dropped, and we stared at each other in wild surmise. The patterns not only fitted; they explained some otherwise inexplicable plot twists in that novel." [1]
- No argument or analysis on why this is so, just an offhand remark that two sci-fi authors once, in conversation, analysed it as such.
- If that line is going to be added back, I would suggest making some effort to explain how the theory of Mary-sue-ism fits LHOD. Otherwise, it remains an opaque attack on the work. JJ 23:06, 21 February 2006 (UTC)
What is the meaning of "The Left Hand of Darkness"?
- As I recall, it's light in this case. Hold on . . . yes, a little online investigation tells me I'm right. The novel deals a lot with themes of duality and opposition, and unity-in-duality. The narrator brings up the yin-yang in one conversation with someone from Winter, saying that the Gethenian embodies the symbol: "Light, dark. Fear, courage. Cold, warmth. Female, male. It is yourself, Therem. Both and one."--4.17.135.10 22:59, 19 Aug 2004 (UTC)