Book Review: The God Engines, by John Scalzi

Oct 15, 2010 10:05

One-line summary: Scalzi channels Lovecraft, gets Terry Pratchett & Joss Whedon instead


Read more... )

john scalzi, books, reviews, toxic bucket of crazy, science fiction

Leave a comment

Comments 17

swissmarg October 15 2010, 18:11:12 UTC
Awesome cover art.

Reply


fpb October 15 2010, 19:33:31 UTC
gods in a polytheistic setting competing for worshipers is a fantasy invention, not something that happened much in the real world,
I hate to have to tell you this (because I consider Scalzi's implicit theory so much nonsense), but you ought to take a look at the history of Hinduism. And there was a certain amount of competition for popularity in Egyptian religion too.

Reply

inverarity October 15 2010, 20:23:44 UTC
I'm pretty sure Scalzi doesn't actually believe in his "theory." (In fact, I know he doesn't, because he's an atheist/agnostic.)

People in polytheistic cultures did marketing and recruiting for their gods (as people in monotheistic cultures do), but I don't think most of them actually subscribed to the common fantasy trope mentioned above, that the god with the most worshipers becomes Number One God and gets to eat all the others.

Reply

fpb October 15 2010, 20:43:13 UTC
The point is rather that, as someone said, "God" is not the singular of "gods". Hindus actually get mad at you if you call them polytheists: they will tell you that all their gods are nothing but aspects of the One. God, in the singular, is the principle of existence; the gods, in the plural, are individual powers - and it is logically absurd to imagine that one of them may be promoted to principle of all existence, just like that. From that point of view, it is clear that Scalzi writes coherently with his atheism, in that he is unable and unwilling to imagine God in the proper sense.

Reply

inverarity October 15 2010, 21:06:01 UTC
it is clear that Scalzi writes coherently with his atheism, in that he is unable and unwilling to imagine God in the proper sense.

...or that he was writing about a fantasy universe.

Reply


Rhemus wrote anonymous October 15 2010, 19:53:23 UTC
because for the most part, gods in a polytheistic setting competing for worshipers is a fantasy invention, not something that happened much in the real world,

Pope Gregory saw some slaves in the market, quipped "Non angli sed angeli." = "Not angels, but Anglicans." and believed that the pun was a Sign from God that he should send missionaries to England to Compete for Worshippers.

In the real world, ALL missionary work = Competing for Worshippers is done by priests of each denomination because they are the only people who can do it. In Fantasy land, gods DO exist and can do some missionary duty themselves.

It ain't just Discworld where Gods WANT to be worshipped. Stargate Ori fed on worship and grew stronger. Star Trek, the Olympians faded away without worship.

Reply

Re: Rhemus wrote inverarity October 15 2010, 20:27:15 UTC
Dang, I should have mentioned Stargate when citing other examples of that trope. Scalzi is a consultant on SGU (I try to forgive him for it), so I don't doubt SG and Trek also influenced him.

Reply

Re: Rhemus wrote fpb October 15 2010, 20:46:41 UTC
Pope Gregory almost certainly said nothing of the kind - it is a fable written down centuries after he died. And historically most missionaries have always been laymen. People become converted from personal contact. Also, some religions are missionary (Buddhism and Christianity), most are not (Hinduism, Hebraism, Zoroastrianism, Islam, etc.). Islam, and Hinduism too, have spread by military conquest, but practically never by proselitism.

Reply

Re: Rhemus wrote anonymous October 16 2010, 22:10:15 UTC
I should have written "MEMBERS of the Denominations do Missionary duty." rathers than "PRIESTS"

My point was that in Real Life only Humans are available for missionary duty; but in Fantasy Land, Hobbits and Gods exist. Therefore Hobbits and Gods are available for missionary duty.

Reply


Polytheism and pseudepigraphy anonymous October 16 2010, 01:56:11 UTC
"...gods in a polytheistic setting..."

Like Christianity.

Besides the old "3=1" polytheism (`cause three don't equal one, kiddies, no matter how you try to wrangle it), each separate cult of Christianity (you know: the Catholics, the Anglicans, the Lutherans, the Presbyterians, the Methodists, etc ad absurdum) believes different ideas about its god. In a philosophical sense, they're pretty incompatible, and essentially different Christian gods.

"...a fable written down centuries after he died..."

Sort of like the gospels.

Reply

(The comment has been removed)

Re: Polytheism and pseudepigraphy anthonyjfuchs October 16 2010, 21:22:53 UTC
I can say the same, actually. That was the age at which I began questioning the cult I'd been raised in (Catholicism), so that was when I began studying the material for myself, learning the requisite languages for reading what documents I could get hold of, discovering the history of the book's composition ( ... )

Reply


That's enough inverarity October 17 2010, 00:22:18 UTC
Knock it off, both of you. anthonyjfuchs, stop poking.

fpb, I am not amused that you posted a bunch of comments here, deleted them, and then went and reposted the exchange on your own LJ.

Reply


Leave a comment

Up