The Reading Vent & Rant Thread

[Cactus Chef]

Reading a sci-fi book from the early 80s and taken aback by a random passage:

“It will suffice.” Zane left them and strode to the church on the other side of the nursing home.

He was in luck. The church choir was rehearsing for the coming weekend service. Several black girls were present, doing what to Zane’s ear was a mishmash of notes and ululations.

The preacher spotted him immediately. “Hey, don’t you go takin’ none of mine, Death!” he protested. “We’re good folk here. We don’t want no trouble with you!”

Zane realized that this church might be poor and backward, but the preacher was a true man of God, able to discern a supernatural manifestation instantly. That would help. “I only want a hymnbook and a singer,” Zane said.

I guess it was just socially acceptable in the 80s to insinuate that black churches were somehow not "real" churches?

The character in question is also not a devout man by any stretch, so you have to assume that the judgment is the omniscient narrator's (i.e. the author's) more than the character's.

[DiapDealer]

Piers Anthony's Incarnations of Immortality?

[Cactus Chef]

Originally Posted by DiapDealer

Piers Anthony's Incarnations of Immortality?

I didn't want to name-and-shame lest it start a flame war.

[DiapDealer]

No judgement one way or another here. I just recognized the character (and their incarnation) from a long ago read.

[DNSB]

At one time, I spent too much time dredging through the Internet looking for sourdough bread recipes. The best I can say is that many looked like they were copied from each other and a good chunk of the rest read as if they were written by someone who never actually made the recipe.

The major agreement from most of them plus friends who were into baking was that rising depended on your starter, room temperature (or fridge temperature if you were into cold rising and proofing) and on what one baker's blog described as using all their senses. Pretty much everything else seemed to be a matter of personal opinion. So pretty much what @Renate said.

In my defence, at least I never named my starter, it gave me something I enjoyed doing while almost everything was shutdown during COVID and it reinforced my belief that unlike cooking, baking is a science where exact measurements are important.

[DNSB]

Originally Posted by Cactus Chef

Reading a sci-fi book from the early 80s and taken aback by a random passage:

I guess it was just socially acceptable in the 80s to insinuate that black churches were somehow not "real" churches?

The character in question is also not a devout man by any stretch, so you have to assume that the judgment is the omniscient narrator's (i.e. the author's) more than the character's.

I would tend to disagree. Looking at bringing in "Livin' Sludge" for the music and the comment about white do-gooders who bought hymnbooks that the church could not use, I suspect if anything, the author thought that black churches were more real. Places where staff and the congregation are more likely to be believers and not attending church just because it's what you do on Sunday to see and be seen.

Yes, Piers Anthony is agnostic tending more towards atheistic as he ages. Someone who asked the question if an all powerful god exists, why don't they do something about evil? Why do so many religions exist? For those in the Abrahamic tradition, why would a god who is omniscient have allowed the Lightbearer to revolt? Why are so many religions convinced that they have the only path to Heaven or it's equivalent and that all the rest of the world is doomed to eternal punishment or at best, the equivalent of eternal boredom. You may want to read the Tarot trilogy for more on this.

As for the character not being devout? Why would he need to be devout to want to bring a dying man his last wish? He is now an incarnation of Death. He does not need to believe in God, Satan and their related artifacts—he knows they exist and does not need to take their existence on faith. Does he need to be deeply devoted to a religion or a cause? No. Perhaps he may be devoted to doing the best job of being Death.

[Sirtel]

Being poor and backward is not synonymous with not real, nor does it necessarily imply so.

There are plenty of poor and/or backward people and institutions in the world. Are they less real than rich and/or forward-looking ones? Of course not. And I didn't get the impression from your example that the author thinks so, either.

[Cactus Chef]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

Being poor and backward is not synonymous with not real, nor does it necessarily imply so.

There are plenty of poor and/or backward people and institutions in the world. Are they less real than rich and/or forward-looking ones? Of course not. And I didn't get the impression from your example that the author thinks so, either.

I daresay if you walked into a black church and said, "Boy this place sure is poor and backward, but I can tell you're truly god-fearing men!", you'd get punched in the face. I don't know how you can read "backward" as anything less than judgemental, as it implies there is a correct mode of worship from which this sect deviates.

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by Cactus Chef

I daresay if you walked into a black church and said, "Boy this place sure is poor and backward, but I can tell you're truly god-fearing men!", you'd get punched in the face. I don't know how you can read "backward" as anything less than judgemental, as it implies there is a correct mode of worship from which this sect deviates.

Everyone would take offense at being called backward, not just black folks. And yes, of course it's judgmental. Still, "backward" doesn't mean "wrong", "incorrect" or "not real" as far as I know, not being a native speaker. You can be true, honest, sincere, devout and still backward.

[j.p.s]

In US culture, backward as an adjective almost always has a derogatory connotation.

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by j.p.s

In US culture, backward as an adjective almost always has a derogatory connotation.

Here as well. But it doesn't mean "not real" or "wrong". It means primitive, unsophisticated, undeveloped, even narrow-minded. And yes, it's insulting. But not in the sense of being somehow less real.

[Aleron Ives]

Originally Posted by Sirtel

But it doesn't mean "not real" or "wrong".

I would agree that it doesn't mean "wrong" in a moral sense, but I do think it means "wrong" in an "incorrect" sense. "You people are doing X, when you should be doing Y! You're so backward," is definitely a judgement about the incorrectness of how those people are behaving. To say something is backward is to suggest that there is a forward, i.e. correct, alternative.

[Sirtel]

Originally Posted by Aleron Ives

I would agree that it doesn't mean "wrong" in a moral sense, but I do think it means "wrong" in an "incorrect" sense. "You people are doing X, when you should be doing Y! You're so backward," is definitely a judgement about the incorrectness of how those people are behaving. To say something is backward is to suggest that there is a forward, i.e. correct, alternative.

That's the first I've heard about this. I've never read a book where "backward" was used in that sense. And no dictionary gives this as a meaning, either.