The Sparrow gives us yet another author's vision of humankind expanding to new worlds. As in The Martian Chronicles and Speaker for the Dead, human beings initiate contact with the aliens by traveling to a distant planet. Mary Doria Russell seems to think the Jesuits will have the kind of influence necessary to travel between solar systems by 2019, but she has a PhD, so I won't question her judgment.
That aside, Russell uses her training as an anthropologist to give shape to some of the inconsistencies that arise when cultures encounter each other. In fact, this book is kind of horrifying in the way that the first half comes together entirely as if "God wants this to happen," and then the entire second half is spent watching these beautiful, talented, intelligent, qualified people absolutely fail in spite of their best efforts. In spite of their best intentions and efforts, the differences in the societies tear down all their work. With no malice on either side, the humans are killed, tortured, and raped due only to societal differences.
This goes beyond Schmitt-ian friend-enemy logic. Aside from the intentions of people or states, cultures may be totally incompatible with each other. What is a violation of life or holiness or dignity to one society may be a customary greeting or a sign of praise to another. In this new framework, one society may be the enemy of one in spite of attempts to be "friendly."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I would agree with Chicodelabarba, this novel goes beyond Schmittian friend-enemy logic. Cultures may be completely incompatible in terms of value systems despite efforts to be “friendly.” To a less severe extent, was this not the case when the Europeans met the Native Americans? The natives had no concept of ownership, in fact such an idea conflicted with their worldview, yet they engaged in a deal with the colonists granting them Manhattan for $24 dollars.
ReplyDeleteAs Chicodelabarba said, “What is a violation of life or holiness or dignity to one society may be a customary greeting or a sign of praise to another.” The Jana’ata’s customs are, in our standards, cruel, yet there was no malice on their part. Again, the question ‘where should the use of cultural relativism end and the assertion of black and white morality begin?’ comes to my mind. This reminds me of Speaker for the Dead when the xenologers learn that piggy mothers die in childbirth, and in Grass when we learn the Foxen basically eat their young, the peepers. The difference in this story is that the Jana’ata intimately involved the humans, especially Emilio, in their customs of servitude and dependency. To a certain extent, there was no us-other distinction then, the Jana’ata did not exclude the humans from their practices.