Well, I’m not sure who you are quoting (although I suspect no-one…you just gave that impression, is all :)), but unfortunately that’s all a lot[ of people can see. There’s much more to it than that. I don’t want to hijack this thread, but decided to clarify the “Firefly” reference as a bit of ignorance fighting. I suspect (don’t know, but suspect) that Fenris’ sources of information didn’t read the book, either. It’s actually a monster story, with a group of people hunting and being hunted by a creature they term ‘firefly’ due to its use of pheromones to immobilize/distract prey while it attacks them. The group of people split off into pairs to cover more territory and watch each others’ backs while tracking it down. To kill the time while they’re waiting for something to happen, one of the characters (Œnone) tells stories to her companion. The scenario between Mad and Nymph is one of those stories, so even within the context of the novel, it’s presented as a fiction. The only connection to the main storyline is that some of her stories later prove to have origins in her own life experience. The scenario is confined to one chapter out of fifty. It is, to my recollection, the only one involving a child in the entire book. Hardly a book that is “simply a defense of pedophiles,” as Fenris was misinformed. Defending pedophiles isn’t remotely the point of it. It DOES, however, as a subtext, address several issues surrounding sexual abuse.
Anthony writes an eight-page “Author’s Note” at the end, which attempts to explain his purpose in writing the novel for those who can only see an “excuse to write lots of detailed child porn scenes for thrills.” It is thought provoking, and it’s tragic to me how thoroughly the “ICK” factor prevents people (and society in general) from being able to think outside certain boxes, especially when our children are at stake. He believes that society doesn’t take a hard enough line against child abusers, but at the same time believes we as a society need to take a serious look at what we are doing to our children, precisely because they are helpless before adult imperatives. He believes that we can’t allow the “ICK” factor to get in the way of our thinking; and I would have to agree with him on that, because we very frequently do.
The problem is that in books that I have read, Anthony’s narrators have a thing for little girl’s panties with a creepy Homer Simpson “mmmmmm…panties” tone. The tone of the writing shows that the narrator enjoys (Yes, I can document this) having little boys and girls put into sexualized situations and watching them squirm. He provides no consequences to potential molesters. In Heaven Cent, none of the women who try to molest the nine year old Prince Dolph (who doesn’t want to be molsested…that’s what makes it funny! Right? :rolleyes: ) suffers any consequences. None. There’s an ongoing theme that if someone tries to molest you, no-one will help you and you shouldn’t talk about it, since no-one will care. And it’s really no big deal, anyway. Since the Xanth books are marketed at teens, I find this horrible.
And in Firefly, even by your own description, an adult has sex with a FIVE YEAR OLD girl who has been raped by her brother. Therapy for rape-victims isn’t having sex with the “therapist”. And Anthony trots out all the famous molester’s excuses: “It helped her”, “She inititated it”, “It was consentual”. “She enjoyed it” He may be raising provokative points, but your description makes it sound like Anthony has read the molester’s handbook and decided to provide a defense of it, especially in light of his other books. I’m firmly of the opinion that any sexual relationship between a FIVE year old and an adult is unhealthy since the five year old lacks the experience to make an informed choice and since the relationship is so unequal in power. But we may be getting into GD territory here.
I haven’t personally noticed a predominance of pedophilic themes in his books, but I by no means have read them all (about the first half-dozen Xanth books in high school, Firefly, and several short stories). He does figure sex into things a lot, and sometimes rather socially upsetting sex (ever read In the Barn? Oy!). My impression has been, however, that it isn’t so much for his own (or the reader’s) titillation as it is to get people to think about sex in a larger context than society currently approves of. At least in Firefly, that’s the very reason that he himself gives for some of the subthemes expressed in the book (such as the Mad/Nymph thing: we’re conditioned to see Mad as the abuser, but he’s the only one that Nymph did not feel hurt by. We want to ignore her perspective because it doesn’t agree with ours; Anthony seems to be saying that we should take the child’s perspective more seriously because there may be more validity to it than we’d like to admit). Overall, he seems to believe that we need to take a more honest and less disapproving look at the whole concept of sex, as that would lead to a better ability to deal with its issues effectively. That includes the parts of it we aren’t comfortable with.
Unfortunately, it’s a bit difficult to discuss Anthony’s unusual perspective on sex without going there. I don’t want to hijack this thread in that direction (and hope I haven’t irrevocably), so if you’re up for a GD thread on this, I’m cool with that. It seems like a more appropriate place to discuss this subject. I could more thoroughly address your post over there, too (which I would like and am more than willing to do), without further interrupting this thread…which was about what again? :). So here we go.
Yep, I re-read the posts and you did indeed mention harold robbins. Not to sound bitchy, but I tend to glaze over reading posts with no punctuation or capitalization. :rolleyes:
