[LMB] TSK: Beguilement Re-read -- Questions for Chapter 3

[V L'Ecuyer]

>
> From: "Thad Coons" <tocoons at gmail.com>
>    I suppose I'm a bit irritated by the question itself, because I'm not
> nearly so interested in what makes it a good romance, or a good fantasy,
> or
> whatever, as in what makes it a good story.  I'm not concerned with how
> well
> it fits within a particular classification or genre, because it seems
> that the better a work fits a particular classification, the
> more stereotyped and less original it is.  Then again, my reading is't
> confined to a particular genre: I mostly read fantasy and SF, but I've
> also
> enjoyed romance, mystery, westerns, spy thrillers, and whatnot.


Me:
FWIW, I'm doing this blind right now. I loaned my book out to a friend last
year and haven't got it back. If she doesn't bring it to tonight's meeting,
I'll have to make a road trip to retrieve it. Until I can read ahead, you're
stuck with generic questions.

I also encourage you to start asking your own questions, too. They don't
even have to be in chapter order, either.



> [snipped]



>
> From: "Thad Coons"
>    I wonder about cultural expectations. In our own 19th century, before
> 4,
> 8, or 12 years of secondary and higher education became almost abligatory
> before a child could function as an adult, [Refraining, with difficulty,
> from climing on my soapbox] it wasn't uncommon for women to marry around
> age
> 16.  14 years old wasn't too young. In this kind of social context, Fawn
> seems to be rather unusually sheltered for her age.  Mari complains about
> the farmer's lack of control of their own fertility also seem a bit
> odd...Pehaps there's a bit of culturaly jealousy, there? But that's more
> properly a subject for another chapter.
>




 Me:
Just because a 14 year old could get married didn't automatically mean they
did, either. I know people in the 20th century who were only allowed to get
an 8th grade diploma before entering the work force as an adult at the age
of 13. Those people didn't get married unti their 20's.

If you go back further in history, to Europe, before the Americas were
settled, a person could only get married when they had either earned enough
to support a wife or had sufficient household goods and/or monitary
resources to stock and manage a house. That meant people waited until their
mid-20's to get married.

I don't consider TSK's world to be analgous to the 19th century. The tech is
nowhere near what was available during the industrial revolution.

Pre-industrial era living conditions and wages combined with the length of
time it takes to do decent handwork meant everyone had to wait. Even when
they started working at the age of 10 -- or younger. With a sewing machine
and a piece of yardage from a textile mill, I can make a simple shirt in
about 2 days (or a few hours if done all at once, which never happens). When
I have to card the fibers, spin the yarn and weave the fabric? I don't even
know. Someone else on the list will have to provide estimates.

If I'm remembering my history correctly, one of the reasons the Puritans
failed to be the "shining light on the hill" is that the younger generation
brought up on the edge of the frontier chose to go off on their own,
breaking ground. When faced with submit to the elders' rather onerous rules,
regulations and guidelines, more and more of the subsequent generations
decided to go off on their own. It was easier for them to be an adult
elsewhere than prove it at home.

Fawn's eldest brother was engaged, but not yet married. I don't recall any
age spreads, but if I allow 18 months between pregnancies that makes him 24
or 25. If Trill Bluefield managed her fertility and spread the kids out, he
would be older. However, their own father was in his 50's, so I'm betting Ma
and Pa Bluefield didn't get married until their early- to mid-twenties,
either. Assuming they started having kids right away due to lack of proper
fertility management.

Victoria