Inter-Species Dynamics- How Groups Adapt to Survive

Children of God followed up on all the questions left by The Sparrow. We finally see all the workings of Jana’ata society from the inside, we see first-hand the Runa insurrection, we see the way alien contact works out with mercenaries instead of priests, and we see the dynamics of groups composed of multiple races against groups composed of a single race. What I thought was most interesting about the book was the way it forces us to re-examine our pre-existing notions about the Jana’ata.

The most interesting quote was on page 225, where Shetri reminds Danny Iron-Horse that “it was not only the Runa who were born to their fate- we all were!” Our sympathies are reversed. The Runa, who were once pitiable in their subservience to the Jana’ata, are now blood-thirsty rebels who follow Sophia and Supaari’s vengeful whims. The Jana’ata, who knew as little that they were doing wrong by eating children as the Runa knew they were by giving up children, are forced onto “reservations.” Their proud hunter society is forced to bow to the wishes of its prey.

The second interesting point of this book is the different alliances of species, and how they manage to work together. It seems that the two most dynamic groups in the novel are the Runa resistance and the Isaac/Ha’anala/Shetri party, both of which are composed of many different species. The strange fact that the Runa resistance is headed by a human being and a Jana’ata outcast leads me to think that the very impressionable Runa are being exploited for human and Jana’ata interests. When Supaari and Sophia both die, perhaps the Runa will be manipulated to some other purpose. Perhaps they are little better than intelligent pack-animals. But perhaps they are the more survivable species because they are better able to adapt.

Ha’anala and Isaac’s group is more complicated because it is led by a Jana’ata and a human who were raised in a Runa camp. They head a party that is mostly Jana’ata, is accepting of all species, and refuses to needlessly kill any sentient being. Somehow, the most morally righteous group in the whole book ends up being a group of disenfranchised Jana’ata, led by a Jana’ata and an autistic human who were both raised in a militant Runa camp. It seems that in Children of God, the most successful groups as well as the most sympathetic, are those that are able to adapt most quickly to changing species-relations.

Darmok, Understanding, and Communication

On Thursday (4/8) we watched “Darmok,” an episode of Star Trek that illustrates the difficulties of communicating with an alien species that has a language structured completely differently from human languages. This brought up the question “what is communication?”

Even the Starfleet universal translator failed to interpret the Darmok language because it used references to Darmok legends in order to communicate abstractions or emotions. As a consequence, the only way to understand the Darmok would be to spend time learning their myths and stories, as well as the syntactical methods of interpreting their meanings.

This lesson of understanding might be useful in some of the other novels we read. In order to make Picard understand, the Darmok force him to engage in a Darmok bonding ritual. Many of our novels involve attempts at understanding species whose languages are known. As Sandoz says in The Sparrow, “The ability to speak a language perfectly does not necessarily convey any understanding of it.” (p232) In a way, the Stella Maris crew understands as little about Rakhati culture as the Enterprise crew does about Darmok. Even after living with the Runa, the humans don’t know anything of Jana’ata-Runa relations, and they attempt to involve themselves in them before having a complete understanding. This strikes me as a failure to communicate.

Cultural Infection in The Sparrow

Ok I've been putting it off for a long time, but here's the Conquest of America post. Even though everyone knows slow and steady wins the race, I really need to get up to speed on my blogging. One of the most interesting concepts that Todorov puts forth in Conquest of America is the distinction that the Spaniards make between themselves and the Aztecs. On page 153, he quotes an account that compares the natives to women, children, and monkeys. Each station denotes a greater differentiation from the status "man."

One of the great difficulties we’ve been having talking about the Jana’ata from The Sparrow is that we have been trying to judge them as we would judge humans. Unlike the Aztecs, who were humans, the Jana’ata and Runa are unequivocally not human. Like the Aztecs, they are alien and, to our sensibilities, sometimes savage. Of course they are not exactly animals either. But the flaw in our approach to the aliens is to misidentify them with humans.

Introducing technology, agriculture, and rebellion to the alien culture was nearly as fatal in The Sparrow as the Spaniards’ introduction of their own culture (and diseases and warfare) to Mexico. What the humans failed to realize is that, as the (potentially) dominant species, their influence would inevitably dominate the other species’ ways of life. Now civil violence and overpopulation are blighting the formerly placid Rakhat civilization. They might have saved some trouble by sending an army.

M is for Miscommunication

Throughout Eifelheim I was just waiting for the other shoe to drop. From the first moment that the Krenken started becoming interested in Jesus Christ and his proposed return to Earth, it was pretty clear that Dietrich and the Krenken were not on the same page. I was, frankly, surprised when nothing serious arose from this miscommunication. It is a pretty severe difference to see Jesus as the son of God and humanity's savior and to see him as a being from space who can help a group of aliens get back home. The worst part about this confusion was that their interpretation made sense. If you read Dietrich's explanations while imagining that you have no knowledge of Christianity or the One God, but have a good understanding of space travel, the Krenken's assumptions are completely reasonable. Taking religion literally rather than figuratively is a problem even within human society. And misinterpretations of religious ideas and messages are a common source of problems and conflicts.

One example of one such unfortunate misinterpretation can be found here. Basically, a sect of churches in South Korea had predicted that, on a specific day in 1992, the faithful would ascend to heaven. This would then be followed by seven years of trials and, finally, the Armageddon. Clearly, this is a pretty serious claim to make. It led many followers to sell their belongings, leave their jobs, and abandon their families. The church simply apologized, saying that they misinterpreted the Bible. That's one extreme misinterpretation..."Oh, sorry...we thought the world was going to end. Our bad."

It's examples like this that made me think that Eifelheim was going to end badly. I was honestly underwhelmed when the remaining Krenken just stayed peacefully among the villagers. Since most of them were expecting Herr Jesus to appear any day, it seemed that they would become frustrated when that didn't happen. And somehow, the majority of them managed to fly off without the Second Coming. What did that mean to the Krenken believers? In any case, the Krenken who were converted did demonstrate that their manners and attitudes were, to some extent, altered by their newfound religion. However, it still seems that they could never truly understand the Christian belief system because of its basis in human culture, and even human biology. As the book points out, God made humans in his image, and the Krenken clearly do not fit into this image. So, while the Krenken adopt some of the practices and attitudes of Christians, they do not truly understand what it is they are incorporated into. It's impossible because of their vastly different points of reference and cultures.

Send Someone Else?

Could the harm done by the Jesuit parties have been stopped if another group had been sent instead? This is the question we found ourselves asking after finishing Children of God. Although the sequel ended much better than The Sparrow, the fact remains that the entire Jana'ata species was almost wiped out by the Runa and their society has been drastically and irrevocably changed. So the question remains, could anyone else have done things differently? I voiced my opinion in class and it has not changed. I believe that any interaction with another species will cause changes in both societies because of the simple nature of discovering something completely new. We saw clearly in Todorov's book the effects of the Europeans' interactions with Native Americans. Even two human cultures cannot meet for the first time without effecting some long-term consequences--whether good or bad.

Furthermore, even if the Rakhat party had not been exceedingly religious, basic human morality goes beyond religion. I say this because I think that the turning point of the whole expedition is when Sophia attempts to save the Runa children from being killed and eaten by the Jana'ata. Her reaction is not thought-out, it is her instinct to try to protect the children of a group that they have lived with and come to love. Even if Sophia was replaced by a scientist who thinks rationally and impartially, I believe it would have been very difficult for this person to simply watch children they know get killed. The only I can see things going any differently is if the party had not lived with the Runa for such a period of time and had tried harder to separate themselves from the Rakhati cultures. Even then, some change would have been inevitable, but maybe it would not have been as extreme.

And extreme is certainly what it was. Sophia took something that could have been a simple rebellion for freedom and made it into a genocide. This is because she projected all of her own experiences of oppression onto the Runa and the Jana'ata. As someone pointed out in class, she made the Runa into Jews and the Jana'ata into Nazis. Although Aaron makes a good point in his post about whether intervention is right or not, this is not exceedingly relevant in Sophia's case. She turns moral intervention into a war that is meant to make up for all the wrongs made against herself and her people. It goes past when it is acceptable to intervene into the territory of how far can one wronged woman go?

The Galactic Clash of Civilizations?

Similar to Jackie, I was left with a much more contented feeling after finishing Children of God. I was also left with a burning question: can one species or race thrive without it being at the expense of another species or race? If we look at most of human history, the answer would be a resounding no. If you look at humanity in the present from a purely objective standpoint you see a species that has risen to dominance on the subjugation and domestication of the natural world, including animals.

It makes me wonder if advancement always means someone or something else’s sacrifice. Russell characterizes this as a “tragedy…the fall of the Jana’ata and their replacement by the Runa…a catastrophe for the Jana’ata but…the best thing that ever happened to the Runa” (Reader’s Guide). Does this mean that, as with the expression ‘what goes up must come down’ – that whenever something is ‘coming down’ something else is ‘going up,’ and vice-versa? It is an interesting thought, unfortunately I do not have the answer…Perhaps if I did we could finally move beyond war.

Throughout the Children of God I also kept thinking, which species are the Aztecs and which are the Europeans, as discussed in The Conquest of America? The Jana’ata certainly seem the more past-looking race, focused on ancient traditions rather than adaptability and man-to-man communication. On the other hand, Emilio and his crew came directly from the Judeo-Christian world, yet they do not prove too swift in man-to man-communication. Rather they get caught up in trying to reform Runa - Jana’ata relations, which perhaps distracts them and leads to the “misunderstanding” that occurred when Supaari gave away Emilio, interpreting the word ‘service’ quite differently from Emilio. There is an interesting mix in both parties of attention to spirituality and/or tradition and focus on human interaction. It seems in this case both parties were caught up in a web of misunderstandings.

The Discovery of Aliens and Religion

I finished Children of God feeling much happier than I did after The Sparrow (although the book seemed to wrap things up a little too happily-ever-after for my taste) and the book also left me with even more questions about what an encounter with another sentient species would mean for humanity. I would like to move on to a topic other than comparative moralities--I'm feeling that this one has been a bit overworked lately. With a title like Children of God, my thoughts did frequently turn to the (supposed) big guy in the sky. In considering the meeting of the religious and the (literally) otherworldly, there are so many questions. Let's start with the basics: what would the discovery of aliens mean for the religions throughout the world? On this topic, it may interest you to know that the Vatican actually has its own observatory and has considered the implications of the discovery of aliens for Christianity. One of the staff members, Guy Consolmagno (who is, incidentally, a Jesuit) wrote a book entitled, Intelligent Life In The Universe? Catholic Belief And The Search For Extra-Terrestrial Life. A blog focusing on the interesting author of this book explains that it is his job to examine such questions as: "...if aliens were discovered, then why would the Bible--supposedly the word of God--contain no information about his non-Earthly creations? If they turn out to be green blobs or sentient gaseous spirals, what's all that talk in the Bible of humankind being created in God's image? What if the aliens wanted to convert us to their God? And do ETs go to heaven?" This blog also brings up other questions that I had not thought of, but Catholics had, such as: is it possible that the alien species had their own version of Adam and Eve and Jesus Christ?

I can see how religious scholars such as Consolmagno might be consumed by such questions; they truly are fascinating. Returning now to fiction, in Children of God we see that the Jana'ata and the Runa do not have their own monotheistic religion. But that does not take anything away from the question of what their existence means for our own religious and spiritual beliefs. The search for meaning engulfs the Jesuits in the book (even the ex-Jesuits like Emilio) and is the true reason for their trip--they need to understand. Emilio needs to know if there is a reason for his suffering, a reason that is implied to be of a higher power. It would take someone with extremely strong spirituality to take the discovery of aliens as a sign from God. I say this because, as the questions presented above show, the discovery of another sentient species would probably raise more doubts than convictions about God's providence. I mean, think about it...the existence of aliens would mean that we're not special, we're not God's only children. As it mentions above, what does that mean for the belief that we were created in God's image? And what if the aliens have their own unshakable beliefs? How do we know that our God is the real God? I find it hard to believe that finding an alien species would immediately lead people to see them as God's other children. It is inherent in human nature to want to feel special, like the human race is one in a million, and who knows how religion would hold up to a discovery that challenges this view.