| Welcome to Shejidan. We hope you enjoy your visit. You're currently viewing our forum as a guest. This means you are limited to certain areas of the board and there are some features you can't use. If you join our community, you'll be able to access member-only sections, and use many member-only features such as customizing your profile, sending personal messages, and voting in polls. Registration is simple, fast, and completely free. Join our community! If you're already a member please log in to your account to access all of our features: |
| Hearsay Or Fact?; Sexuality in Cyteen | |
|---|---|
| Tweet Topic Started: Jun 11 2007, 08:51 AM (2,563 Views) | |
| Theta9 | Jul 21 2007, 01:57 AM Post #31 |
![]()
Muffin Top
![]()
|
Justin and Grant? That would explain how I didn't pick up on it the first three or so times I read Cyteen. |
![]() |
|
| Felicitous Sk8er | Jul 22 2007, 07:57 AM Post #32 |
|
Ice Queen Assassin
![]()
|
Jane & Carolyn are the closest of friends and long-time business partners. Jane is Carolyn's alpha reader & Carolyn totally relies upon Jane for constructive, honest feedback -- feedback that Herself can't get anywhere else. Period. This is no "secret", and other assumptions are flat-out incorrect. They know well what people *assume* -- we've discussed it on multiple occasions, and it drives them a little crazy. Both learned long ago to shake their heads, and laugh that the reason writers tend to live together is because their eccentricities would drive everyone else mad. Carolyn (like Justin) is incredibly gifted. Jane (like Grant) is no intellectual slouch, but her behind-the-scenes work with the computers, business issues, household, etc. helps free Carolyn up to do what Herself does best: write. So in that respect, yes, Justin & Grant's relationship has some similarities. Jane is truly the wind beneath Carolyn's wings in many, many ways, and everyone who loves CJ's work owes Jane a tremendous debt. Carolyn will be the first to tell you that. Also -- Carolyn's IRL non-judgmentalism is reflected in all of her works, including Justin & Grant's relationship. Herself deliberately taunts us about Justin & Grant's relationship: she wants us to thoughtfully consider these issues, endlessly. Such is Herself's :cherryh: power as an author! Herself has us, her readers, *exactly* where she wants us....thinking! Bottom line: Jane told me long ago, & it is absolutely true: Carolyn likes to tease. Take that as you will.... |
![]() |
|
| starexplorer | Jul 22 2007, 03:54 PM Post #33 |
|
First Contact Assassin
![]()
|
The reality is a bit beside the point to the expectable fantasies that arise in readers such as members of this board. It seems to me to make all the sense in the world that it might occur to a person who is aware of the closeness of the relationship and something of their arrangements to consider possible parallels to :cherryh: 's writing. And I would think that even if the relationship is one of "the best of friends only", that seems likely to be relevant to the relationship issues she writes about. On the other hand, I also strongly feel that the work speaks for itself, and we don't need to look outside the texts for understanding. But fantasies are an inevitible consequence of our human nature. |
![]() |
|
| Kokipy | Jul 23 2007, 09:48 PM Post #34 |
![]()
|
Sex is important, and gender preference is important, but I think in :cherryh: 's worlds trust, reliance and emotional support between characters are usually far more important, whether sex precedes them or follows upon their realization or never occurs at all between the characters in question. At one point Pyanfar tells Khym [or was it Jik? I can't now remember but I think it was Khym] that she loves him like a sister, a highly important insight into what kind of relationships she values most. I think the most important aspect of the Justin/Grant relationship is their absolute trust in each other and their emotional bond. The physical side, if there is one and I'm with Joe I hope for Justin and Grant's sakes there is one, is an important part but not so far as I am concerned the driving element, just a very probable and very human consequence of the bell jar they live under, their emotional bond, their seclusion and the terrible pressures on them. To me this is a just another example of :cherryh: 's ability to write convincingly about all facets of the human experience, even those she has not personally experienced. As a science fiction writer most of what she writes about springs fully formed from her imagination, after all. While her life experiences surely inform her understanding of character and motivation, she is not Thomas Wolfe and none of this is disguised autobiography. |
![]() |
|
| Felicitous Sk8er | Jul 24 2007, 01:35 AM Post #35 |
|
Ice Queen Assassin
![]()
|
Well said, Kokipy & Star! :t |
![]() |
|
| sevenall | Jul 24 2007, 05:47 PM Post #36 |
![]()
|
I agree completely with your analysis, Kokipy. Another example I thought of was Beth in "Rimrunners", where it seems very natural that she and the guys on her shift should share sex -- it's merely one of the expressions of the trust and companionship between her and NG or Musa. Very nice, but the act itself doesn't mean anything until she infuses it with meaning. There's another guy on her shift and first she uses sex as a kind of currency with him, but as he starts to defend her and NG actively, that starts to mean something too. And of course, all of this is in stark contrast to the first chapters where she's so far down the food chain that she does use sex as currency to pay for food and board. So NG and the interest she takes in him really is "her voice in the dark" as well, calling her back. |
![]() |
|
| Sandi-ji | Jul 24 2007, 10:28 PM Post #37 |
![]()
|
Thoughtful discussion here, but just wanted to point out a clue, Jane makes no bones about her own interests on her website:
|
![]() |
|
| Kokipy | Jul 25 2007, 07:13 PM Post #38 |
![]()
|
Yes, I had that in mind myself. |
![]() |
|
| Chomiji | Jul 25 2007, 07:38 PM Post #39 |
![]()
Mahen Operative
![]()
|
>> other assumptions are flat-out incorrect << Thank you, Sk8er-Ji. A gay friend of mine asked recently, and I had no idea what to say. No, it's not anyone else's business, but for someone who feels marginalized, like my friend, it was a very attractive thought - especially as he is something of a fan of hers. |
![]() |
|
| Felicitous Sk8er | Jul 25 2007, 09:28 PM Post #40 |
|
Ice Queen Assassin
![]()
|
I think Kokipy-ji said it best (emphasis mine):
....and because of this, would hope that no matter what, your friend would not feel "marginalized", at least in :cherryh: 's universe. I think Herself would consider this a huge compliment. I must admit I thought long & hard before posting on this topic. After all, relationships are private...and I am cautious about the line between "public" vs. "personal". However, speculation has periodically recurred on Shejidan. While copying old threads over, I had recently stumbled on multiple old posts, originated long before I was on the scene, in which several individuals presented their (incorrect) *opinions* & *assumptions* as *fact*. And that's what drives me cRaZy! :t This is a very interesting conversation however, all facets of it. I hope the literary aspect continues, now that the personal aspects have been laid to rest. |
![]() |
|
| Theta9 | Jul 26 2007, 12:33 AM Post #41 |
![]()
Muffin Top
![]()
|
I once asked if :cherryh: was childfree for exactly the same reason. |
![]() |
|
| starexplorer | Jul 26 2007, 04:17 AM Post #42 |
|
First Contact Assassin
![]()
|
I understand, Sk8er-ji, your frustration with those who present ignorant assumptions as fact. It is indeed difficult to stomach this kind of outrageous speech! But it also reminds me of a pet peeve of mine: All too often I see a public person -- perhaps a professional athlete worried about endorsement money -- denying to the media that he (usually it is a he) is gay. I understand not wanting to cost yourself big bucks. But just once I would like to see one of these heterosexuality-asserting stars say "My sexuality is no one's business but my own. I will not demean myself by responding to these rumors, nor do I care what conclusions anyone wishes to draw from my position. The important thing is to be comfortable with who one is." |
![]() |
|
| suzdal | Jul 26 2007, 03:41 PM Post #43 |
|
Minister of Silly Hats
![]()
|
Sigh. To me, sexuality is a slippery slope. In my experience the classifications "gay" and "straight" are way too polarized to accurately capture the rich diversity of the spectrum of human sexual expression. Even if you throw in "bi" as a third bucket. Still too narrow. In fact, just because a guy wants to sleep with a guy and not a girl, I wouldn't call him "gay". What if he only wanted to once? What if half of the time he sleeps with women? Or dogs? Or what if he wants to but never does? What if it's only guys wearing football cleats? Or straight jackets? Or are twenty years older? Or younger? I think that "gay" is more of a sociological/lifestyle kinda thing. It's almost like saying that someone is a "Christian" - what does that really tell you about them? Field too large. Too many variables. Anyway, as human beings we categorize as a strategy to interface our finite perceptions and processing capabilities with the comparative infinity of reality (one of my dearly cherished beliefs). As a result, bucketing everyone and everything is simply irresistible - but also flawed and incomplete. I'm a microprovincialist - I feel like my next door neighbors are complete aliens with their own subculture, rituals and language. Blah, blah, blah. In a nutshell, I'm trying to say that I think that categorizing people can be inaccurate and while they often act according to type they often don't. Peace, Suzdal |
![]() |
|
| hrhspence | Aug 3 2007, 03:53 AM Post #44 |
|
Hani Assassin
![]()
|
from Nand'Sidjei's Blog:
That answers that question from her own mouth. |
![]() |
|
| knn envoy | Aug 3 2007, 05:03 AM Post #45 |
![]() ![]()
|
The thread, as I recall, was sexuality in Cyteen. The author's supposed, possible, likely, or actual sexuality is generally immaterial. If there is speculation from folks in general, it may be because our language is not especially robust in terms of describing relationships outside of the (historically recent) nuclear family, and, the rationale may go, if something walks and quacks like a duck, it may be mistaken for one at a glance. People do have a need to label things: the prerogative of Adam. Consider the need to impose order on an otherwise chaotic world. We reassure ourselves through words that we understand the universe. So what about Ms. Cherryh? To be honest, I don't care to have the question answered by anybody, maybe not even her. I love her work and her ideas, and I regard her privacy as her privacy. She shares what she will. I'm grateful for her work, and I dislike even seeming like I'm poking into areas that are not my concern. I ran through some possibilities, trying to suspend what I read in the boards, and I thought: She may simply be straight and in what's regarded as an unconventional relationship, which takes guts and ingenuity; she may simply be gay and in the closet, which also takes guts and ingenuity. Either way, or whatever else, she's one hell of a writer, and I'm more interested in discussing Justin and Grant. They can't get hurt by speculation. |
![]() |
|
| 1 user reading this topic (1 Guest and 0 Anonymous) | |
![]() Our users say it best: "Zetaboards is the best forum service I have ever used." |
|
| Go to Next Page | |
| « Previous Topic · The Cherryh Grove · Next Topic » |

















8:47 AM Jul 11