FIND in
<--prev V205 next-->
Date: Thu, 23 May 2002 12:20:17 -0400 (EDT)
From: Michael Straight 
Subject: Re: (urth) TBOTSS and colonialism

On Wed, 22 May 2002, Alice K. Turner wrote:

> The interesting point, to me, is whether the inhumi can really be considered
> "evil." In a debate, I'd enjoy taking the side that they are not. And that
> Wolfe shows the humans, who do not have their needs and nature, as more
> evil.

At the least, I'd say the inhumi are evil in the sense that a thing might
be called evil (atom bombs, torture devices, pornographic movies, crack
coccaine, a computer virus).  That is, something that harms people or does
evil because of way it was made.

On the other hand, I think its implied that the inhumi are as much persons
as chems.  Their souls may be derivative, but they are real, and they seem
to be capable of making real choices to do good or evil.  I think their
nature makes it very difficult to do good, but not impossible.  Is Wolfe's
view of humanity much different?  If the book seems to imply that the
inhumi are incapable of redemption, isn't it only to the extent that human
society is incapable of redemption?



<--prev V205 next-->