y this is kind
of a twisted love story - like
"Days"
Wes
Chapman: OK, good point,
Carlie. So why doesn't the
"rational talk" option work out better?
Brandon D.
Geuder: The only time there is any
mutuality is when Tam gives the priestess seeds and she, in
return, gives
him healing
Brandon P.
Christol: Tam only wants sex with
her for power, and the same goes for the Priestess. That's
why the choice
of equilibrium doesn't exist.
There's no love, no feelings, just a hope of attaining power.
That's not what
sex is supposed to be.
Thomas Bradley
Keefner: is this a love story at
all?
Katie E.
Coleman: because rationality and
love don't interact
Wes
Chapman: Brandon, good, so why
doesn't THAT thread work out any better than when he doesn't give
the seeds?
Brandon D.
Geuder: Bingo Katie...I think
there is a huge divide between logic and emotion in this story.
Joshua P.
Shull: Does the rational talk
option not work out better because the circumstances are not
rational? I
mean, I know this is sci-fi...but, could a point be made that rationality
becomes very strained
when people are
placed under harsher conditions?
Katie E.
Coleman: why isn't there an option
that doesn't include sex at all.
does this imply that sex is in
everything? or maybe that Tam isn't resistanct?
Wes
Chapman: Josh, could be...but I
keep coming back to the idea of sexual mythologies...myths tell us
about the
typical...
Brandon D.
Geuder: I think that the seed
giving thread doesn't work because the third party, Brady, is
involved. A big taboo.
Wes
Chapman: Katie, maybe the base
narrative is basically ABOUT sex.
In that case a non-sexual option
wouldn't make
sense.
Wes
Chapman: Why is Brady involved?
Brandon P.
Christol: i agree. it's all about
sex, and about how NOT to use it
Thomas Bradley
Keefner: Why is Brady involved in
the seed thread?
Carlie R.
Bliss: yeah i really don't get who
or what this brady guy is supposed to represent
Katie E.
Coleman: but i thought sex was a
metaphor for something bigger ...in which case that option
SHOULD exist,
as it does in real life
Wes
Chapman: metaphor for what?
Joshua P.
Shull: That is interesting though,
the point Katie makes about the lack of a non-sexual option....
Katie E.
Coleman: all that we've been
talking about: power, marriage, relationships, life choices ...
everything. life.
Brandon D.
Geuder: Brady, to me, seems like a
very twisted father figure.
He owns the ship and in a way
owns the
Priestess. There's kind of a weird
incestual vibe I get.
Wes
Chapman: Brady...I think of him as
the classic dirty old man...or maybe the classic post-marriage
beer-drinking
football-watching slob...
Joshua P.
Shull: Like my uncle
Brandon P.
Christol: Brady is involved
because Tam and the Priestess are not just there becasue they love
each
other. There is power involved,
and therefore there are other people involved. It's not just two
people who want
to share something, it's a hope of attaining power. Therefore there are other people
involved
Katie E.
Coleman: maybe this cannot work
out for them because of the other people involved, ie brady, the
emperor, nii..
Joshua P.
Shull: So is it saying that sex
between people involves more than just those two people...
Wes
Chapman: So maybe he
"wins"--such an odd word
in this!--because he IS the patriarch, the
husband,
Carlie R.
Bliss: why does brady want to
perform the ceremony with the priestess?
Carlie R.
Bliss: does he get power from
this?
Katie E.
Coleman: his line continues
Brandon P.
Christol: no i think it's saying that
sex between people SHOULD only involve those two people
Wes
Chapman: well, there's the sex
part too...
Joshua P.
Shull: but that it doesn't?
Thomas Bradley
Keefner: I think one problem i
have is that having read out all the options i have issues
calling this a
love story in any option. You
follow out all the lines there's definitely little love to be given
or taken
Christine M.
Klein: i agree with brandon
Carlie R.
Bliss: it's not a love story, i
think it's a power story
Thomas Bradley
Keefner: i'll agree with that
Brandon P.
Christol: right. and the whole thing is, they want power, but they are
engaging in an act that
should be
reserved for LOVErs
Thomas Bradley
Keefner: should be but it isn't
Brandon P.
Christol: exactly
Brandon P. Christol: and then no one wins
Brandon P.
Christol: at least neither of the
two involved
Wes
Chapman: If these are all bad
options, why are THESE THREE bad options chosen? Is there something
about these
options that makes them especially likely for us today?
Thomas Bradley
Keefner: Brandon if you are
talking about love as an equilibrium there shouldn't be any
winner there
either
Katie E.
Coleman: yes brad! everyone keeps saying 'should.' but
does our society work with what 'should'
happen ... i
think the answer is obvious
Joshua P.
Shull: Is that why all the options
end up the same, then? Because they, as Christol says, are
engaging in an
act reserved for LOVErs, and since there is no love, they cannot obtain an
extraordinary
result?
Katie E. Coleman: you go in w/ bad intentions, you get
nil out of it except the actual act of sex
Wes
Chapman: OK, I have to ask. What is love anyway?
Joshua P.
Shull: wow
Joshua P.
Shull: that's the million dollar
question
Brandon P.
Christol: that's an easy one
Brandon P.
Christol: or not
Christine M.
Klein: shared power?
Katie E.
Coleman: no one knows ... they
just think they do or say what it 'should' be
Brandon D.
Geuder: no power?
Joshua P.
Shull: Is love relative?
Wes
Chapman: Is infatuation love? If so, the "dangerous drug"
option counts...
Brandon P.
Christol: sharing of power at the
least
Thomas Bradley
Keefner: infatuation is not love
Carlie R.
Bliss: infatuation is different
from love
Brandon P.
Christol: i agree
Thomas Bradley
Keefner: infatuation
is....infatuation
Brandon P.
Christol: love is something more
meaningful
Joshua P.
Shull: then ...love is love
Wes
Chapman: Such an odd definition of
love, sharing of power....but it sure beats some of the
alternatives...
Carlie R.
Bliss: love involves mutual
respect
Katie E.
Coleman: love means different
things to everyone, so yes it is relative ... it 's a word that gets
thrown around a
lot
Joshua P.
Shull: like midget tossing
Wes
Chapman: I want to go back to
Brady...Is Brady the future Tam, or an actual rival?
Brandon D.
Geuder: Does the author then imply
that love doesn't really exist?
That it is not an option?
Katie E.
Coleman: sex is a lot easier to
love
Brandon P.
Christol: either way, i think love
has to involve a sharing, a mutual respect between two
partners. no control of one over the other
Joshua P.
Shull: See, I thought Brady was
the future Tam
Katie E.
Coleman: brady is the typical
future for marriage
Joshua P.
Shull: But I didn't know if I was
right
Brandon P.
Christol: i like katie's answer
Katie E.
Coleman: bad marriage, but ,most
marriage
Brandon D.
Geuder: Bad how, Katie?
Katie E.
Coleman: he's old and impotent
Carlie R.
Bliss: tam wants power and brady
is an example of what happens when you have power
Thomas Bradley
Keefner: so then marriage is
negative, marriage decomposes man
Brandon P.
Christol: all of these options of
a hope for control result in a "bad marriage," which is true
for most people
today, especially in America, anyway
Brandon P.
Christol: no, today's marriages do
Brandon D.
Geuder: But impotence would assume
that sex is a desirable quantity of a successful marriage...
Katie E.
Coleman: bad marriages with bad
intentions
Brandon P.
Christol: which often don't even
involve love
Wes
Chapman: So why is it so bad in
America today with marriage? Why
THESE THREE options, again?
Joshua P.
Shull: I would think that sex is
"a desirable quantity of a successful marriage."
Carlie R.
Bliss: because power seems to be
very important to people in America
Wes
Chapman: sexual power?
Christine M.
Klein: like i said before - i
think they are optinos which the autor is showing us should NOT
be the
beginning of relationships...even rational talk...love is not rational
Katie E.
Coleman: if you get married for
one of these three options, it's bad?
But otherwise maybe its
okay?
Carlie R.
Bliss: i think any kind of power
Brandon P.
Christol: because either the male
has all the power, the woman does, or they attempt to ignore
the issue
completely. there's no sharing of
power like there should be
Joshua P.
Shull: Marriage is bad today
because people are selfish
Joshua P.
Shull: That's the bottom line
Katie E.
Coleman: so is this story an
illustration of what NOT to do ... in a relationship, marriage, etc?
Thomas Bradley
Keefner: but there's no
relationship
Carlie R.
Bliss: either that or a very
cynical view of relationships
Wes
Chapman: Katie...it's looking that
way...but then why is the story described
as a rite of passage?
Christine M.
Klein: i think the divorce rate is
high because people are standing up for themselves and
demandin shared
power...when it's not shared they leave
Brandon P.
Christol: look at jerry
springer....men can't believe when women leave them for cheating on
them with the
woman's cousin....they want power, control. they need to share
Thomas Bradley
Keefner: they meet on a ship while she's passed out
Brandon P.
Christol: actually i just wanted
to talk about jerry springer...i do it in all my classes
Christine M.
Klein: it's a rite of passage
because you learn best from negative experiences....
Katie E.
Coleman: there is a
relationship...every human being has SOME kind of relationship with
everyone they
meet ... no matter on what level
Wes
Chapman: Carlie, I wonder about that cynicism...is there
no good option because she doesn't believe
one exists, or
is she just forcing the reader to figure out the good option on his or her own?
Katie E.
Coleman: according to the sociatal
view, most rite of passages SHOULD end in marriage
Carlie R.
Bliss: i'm not sure, hopefully the
reader will see that these options don't work and realize that
there is a
better one
Brandon P.
Christol: i think she wants us to
figure out the good option
Christine M.
Klein: i tihk we are forced to find
the good option on our own...
Katie E.
Coleman: but why is marriage an
END, joe? shouldn't it be a
beginning?
Joshua P.
Shull: marriage is a continuation
Wes
Chapman: Brandon and Carlie,
that's what I think too...but what's your evidence for this?
Christine M.
Klein: nothing in the story turns
out good!
Christine M.
Klein: so obviously these are all
the wrong answers
Brandon P.
Christol: well i think the three
options are pretty blatantly extreme.
they either involve a
deep hunger for
power, or avoidance of the issue.
nothing ends up right in any of them. i think there has
to be that
fourth option of sex for the right reasons.
Katie E.
Coleman: but do we see that he
learns anything?
Joshua P.
Shull: but that's not an option
for Tam and the Priestess
Joshua P.
Shull: that 4th option
Brandon P.
Christol: because they don't love
each other. i think that's the
point
Joshua P.
Shull: exactly
Christine M.
Klein: because if it were an
optoin in the story the "point" wouldnt be as effective
Joshua P.
Shull: well, maybe not 'LOVE'...
Wes
Chapman: He's closest with the
rational talk section...later on he gets to ask for Favor from her,
three times,
and she appears to desert Brady
Katie E.
Coleman: so then a point is that
love must exist? why? for what?
Brandon D.
Geuder: Maybe Tam learns that it's
better to suffocate on his ship that to go looking for sex and
power on
somebody else's.
Joshua P.
Shull: a reason to stay single
Wes
Chapman: Brandon, note that that
is not one of the options offered...
Christine M.
Klein: because women have ultimate
power in relationships?
Wes
Chapman: How so, Christine?
Katie E.
Coleman: single, scmingle ...
Christine M.
Klein: when he gets involved with
the woman he loses
Joshua P.
Shull: I think we're all using
POWER in a VERY broad sense..we need to narrow it down
Brandon P.
Christol: she doesn't exactly win
either
Carlie R.
Bliss: i don't think women have
the ultimate power- this is not the case in the relationship
between Brady
and the priestess
Joshua P.
Shull: Power how?
Wes
Chapman: We noted in an earlier
class that it's odd that we mostly see things from Tam's POV...anyone
have an
explanation for that?
Katie E.
Coleman: power is a word just like
love ... undefinable
Joshua P.
Shull: yeah, but at least we can
come up with types of power
Wes
Chapman: no word is undefinable,
just hard to define
Brandon P.
Christol: i don't think either of
them win, and i think it's because they aren't having sex for
the right
reasons. sex should not be a search
for power, but a sharing of it.
Joshua P.
Shull: financial, physical,
emotional...etc
Brandon D.
Geuder: I think that Tam is the
stereotypical male. He is expected to be the one "looking."
Christine M.
Klein: i think power has a
definitaion
Thomas Bradley
Keefner: well what would the
options have been if we saw the story from the priestess pov
Wes
Chapman: Brandon, so does that
imply that women have no role
until they are "awakened" from
"coldsleep"?
Christine M.
Klein: i think that role is dated
Brandon D.
Geuder: I think it would be safe
to assume that, yes.
Wes
Chapman: Brad, good question, how
do you answer it?
Wes
Chapman: Christine, which role?
Katie E.
Coleman: i think the key is that
those words have definitionS (plural) ... does anyone really think
we could get a
whole group of people to agree on any one definition of power? I think it all depends on your
perspective,
which in turn depends on what experiences you've had
Christine M.
Klein: "waiting in
coldsleep"...for the male...
Brandon P.
Christol: i think the options here
would have been the same
Carlie R.
Bliss: there is one point where
the POV switches to the priestess...why is that?
Wes
Chapman: So is she making that
point, that that role is a problem?
Brandon D.
Geuder: I think it is dated to
Christine. But this story seems to
play on all sorts of stereotypes.
Thomas Bradley
Keefner: well the man definitely
gets all the choices here
Wes
Chapman: Good question,
Carlie...in this section, it's during the rational talk option...
Joshua P.
Shull: Stereotypes are great. It
gives us something to argue about.
Brandon P.
Christol: they are all extreme and
very basic. either way, there
wouldn't have been a choice
that involved
love, or sex for the right reasons.
the problem would still remain.
Carlie R.
Bliss: maybe that's because
stereotypes are still very prevalent in our society
Katie E.
Coleman: women who wait until
marriage or childbirth to live are "dead", so are men who only
seek adventure
and beauty
Wes
Chapman: why the priestess POV in
the rational talk section only?
Joshua P.
Shull: makes the most sense there
Joshua P.
Shull: given stereotypes
Katie E.
Coleman: because women are more
rational than men :)
Thomas Bradley
Keefner: it is the only way we
truly get to sort of know her
Christine M.
Klein: and i think that is
wrong... ha - because women
are rational and men sexual
Carlie R.
Bliss: maybe because when people
talk rationally there are two sides to consider
Joshua P.
Shull: good point
Christine M. Klein: that's good carlie
Brandon P.
Christol: i agree with christine
Katie E.
Coleman: yeah carlie
Joshua P.
Shull: I agree with Katie agreeing
with Carlie
Joshua P.
Shull: :)
Wes
Chapman: I can see why not in th
rape thread, but why not in the drug thread?
Brandon P.
Christol: women are rational
(stereotypically), and men are sexual
Wes
Chapman: really?
Brandon P.
Christol: generally
Thomas Bradley
Keefner: no way
Brandon P.
Christol: stereotypically
Katie E.
Coleman: because in the other
options, she's just an object, no need for her pov
Joshua P.
Shull: toss up
Thomas Bradley
Keefner: women are seen as
irrational
Thomas Bradley
Keefner: emotional basket cases
Wes
Chapman: I'd have said that the
stereotype is that women are the emotional ones.
Joshua P.
Shull: and bad drivers
Thomas Bradley
Keefner: true
Katie E.
Coleman: men have hormones, too,
you know
Wes
Chapman: Katie, I see that in the
rape thread, why in the sex as drug thread? remember all that
romance
language...
Thomas Bradley
Keefner: i find it funny that Tam
distracts himself with his helmet in the drug thread
Brandon P.
Christol: but men aren't
stereotypically rational because they just want sex. they think with
their, um,
yeah.
Katie E.
Coleman: but in the drug thread
she's still an object
Wes
Chapman: why?
Katie E.
Coleman: the flowwery words dont
change that
Brandon D.
Geuder: Yeah Brad..Tam decides to
use protection...a helmet if you will.
Christine M.
Klein: because she is being
used...or is it tam being used
Brandon P.
Christol: because that's the only
reason he wants her. because he's
addicted to sex, but not
her. she IS just an object.
Wes
Chapman: I was thinking
football...you know, the classic male ways of avoiding women...
Thomas Bradley
Keefner: her sexuality is being
used
Thomas Bradley
Keefner: her power lies below
Joshua P.
Shull: below?
Christine M.
Klein: i like football
Joshua P.
Shull: Go Rams
Wes
Chapman: but do you hang out in
men's locker rooms?
Thomas Bradley
Keefner: there is nothing really
within her that possesses power, it's her ability to have
sex
Christine M.
Klein: ...
Christine M.
Klein: but tam has the ability to
ahve sex too
Brandon D.
Geuder: Is a woman's sexual power
in GIVING sex? Or giving the
POTENTIAL for sex?
Joshua P.
Shull: potential
Katie E.
Coleman: do men hang out in
women's locker rooms? i don't
understand the point.,
Brandon P.
Christol: you could say the same
for a man
Joshua P.
Shull: as I said earlier...it's
all about the journey, not the destination
Brandon P.
Christol: but WHAT about the
journey
Wes
Chapman: I'm really starting to
question whether women in this story have any power at all
Joshua P.
Shull: That's why marriages trial
off...it's like "game over."
Joshua P.
Shull: :)
Christine M.
Klein: tin this story i dont think
they do
Christine M.
Klein: in
Katie E.
Coleman: the only one who does
have power is insane...hmmmm
Brandon P.
Christol: i think she has power
Christine M.
Klein: why
Christine M.
Klein: ??
Carlie R.
Bliss: i think tam has the least
amount of power out of anyone in this story
Wes
Chapman: re locker rooms...badly
phrased on my part...I'm talking about the male cultures which
men hang out
in--e.g. the locker room--in which women are other
Christine M.
Klein: because it is HIS
options....the readers options which progress the story
Katie E.
Coleman: i think they both do,
just different kinds, just like in real life ... physical vs. mental ...
they both have
pluses and minuses depending on the situation ... sometimes you need both to
survive,
maybe that's
why people get married
Christine M.
Klein: through tam the story
happens
Christine M.
Klein: so does he have the power
Brandon P.
Christol: no one has much power,
but they all have these little powers that they are trying to
exploit and
take advantage of. none of them
work because they're not having sex for the right reasons.
they just want
power.
Katie E.
Coleman: no one has a choice in
anyrthing but tam
Wes
Chapman: well, the reader...
Brandon D.
Geuder: Perhaps your right
Carlie...essentially Tam loses before he even begins. The options
go
nowhere. But Tam doesn't
understand that until it's "game over."
Joshua P.
Shull: To what Carlie said, if Tam
has the least amount of power in the story, and we are
supposed to
read the story as Tam...then how much power do we the readers really have?
Katie E.
Coleman: we are tam
Christine M.
Klein: the reader can ONLY control
tam really
Wes
Chapman: yes
Christine M.
Klein: giving the guy all the
power...