A point of order on Naomi Novik’s Scholomance series.

To wit: Naomi Novik’s Scholomance series is not evocative of “Those Who Walk Away From Omelas.” It is a rejection (whether intended or not) of Le Guin’s malignant thesis that the only options when confronting evil is to either just live with it, or else flee from its power*. There’s always the choice to fight back.

Okay, I’ll get off this soapbox now.

#commissionearned

Moe Lane

PS: …Jesus Christ but the Seventies just utterly sucked, huh?

*I have less contempt for the people in TWWAFO who stayed. They at least made a moral decision and stuck to it, even if it was the hideously wrong one. But you can never trust a coward.

6 thoughts on “A point of order on Naomi Novik’s Scholomance series.”

  1. Yes.

    The ‘70s sucked.

    Hard and long and badly.

    Evil doesn’t even need to be confronted directly – there’s no reason, often, to wade in hammer and tongs, merely doing something else well is enough.

    For all the tedious techno”thrillers” of the ‘80s, the preachy, one-note dismal (with or without mind- and/or pyramid-powered techno-majik) storytelling is just… awful.

    There’s reasons why so few ‘70s books are “timeless”.

    Mew

  2. The 70s was good for… defining the problem. Dystopias of every shape and size.

    Omeleas, yeah, agreed. One thematic thing about all of the dystopias is that they cannot be fought or changed. Except for Logan’s Run and Omega Man (filthy hippie/commie version) off the top of my head.

    The problem is that we seem to be rushing to create every dime store dystopia in the calendar. I am not sure we have room to call the 70s shit.

  3. Of the three childhood memories I can easily nail down in chronology, one was Operation Frequent Wind, and one was Carter giving away the Panama Canal. (The final one was the Orioles winning the Series. And to my young self, they were so amazing as to be almost superhuman.)

    Someone a bit older would comment on domestic terrorism, gas lines, Watergate, Stagflation, the Church hearings, etc.

    Also, disco.

    So, yeah. The ‘70s sucked.

  4. By a nice coincidence, I’ve recently been pondering whether Scholomance is a response to Omelas. If so, Novik makes Le Guin look … childish. In any case, Novik’s trilogy is far superior.

    BTW: (1) It is thanks to Moe’s recommendation that I read Scholomance, and (2) I heartily endorse that recommendation.

    1. So we are going to see a massive musical renaissance in 2025 to make up for how horrible the twenties are being? I dig it.

Comments are closed.