[vortexreader]

Welcome to the second Reading Group discussion. This month we're looking at The Sparrow by Mary Doria Russell - a personal favourite. The novel was published to near unanimous critical acclaim and should make for an interesting discussion.

Please remember, it's never too late to join us in this discussion! If you're new to this forum don't hesitate to contribute.

Below are a few starter questions / statements. These are only my attempt at getting the discussion started...don't feel as though you have to respond to them! Ignore them if you want to!

(1) The Sparrow was originally marketed as a non-genre novel - why do you think this was the case?

(2) Russell uses a complex structure in her novel - switching time frames and character points of view. Does she successfully utilise this technique?

(3) Emilio '...had discovered the outermost limit of faith and, in doing so, had located the exact boundary of despair. It was at that moment that he learned, truly, to fear God.' Is this an adequate summary of the path the character of Emilio takes?

(4) Why were Emilio's hands cut? Is there a metaphor to be found in this act?

(5) Russell is a trained, multi-disciplined scientist and uses areas of knowledge in The Sparrow that aren't normally considered the domain of SF (such as anthropology, geology, economics etc). Has this changed your opinion of what the Science in 'Science Fiction' can mean?

(6) The Sparrow is, in many ways, a traditional First Contact novel. In what ways does it differ to other similiar books?

(7) Personally, I find the characters in The Sparrow incredibly believable and endearing. Do you agree that without her obvious skill at characterisation, Russell's novel would have been less successful?

(8) Does the blunt language and portrayal of violence and sexuality jar with the more philosophical and spiritual aspects of the novel?

(9) Can a non-religious person fully appreciate the novel?

(10) Score the book out of 10!

[estranghero]

Okay, was feeling guilty for not being able to participate in last month's discussion of EG so here's my two cents for this month.

(1) The Sparrow was originally marketed as a non-genre novel - why do you think this was the case?

Because it was more like a philosophical/ theological take on the possiblity of alien life rather than science-fiction. If you've noticed, the science of their ship was not taken up as much as other sf books.

(3) Emilio '...had discovered the outermost limit of faith and, in doing so, had located the exact boundary of despair. It was at that moment that he learned, truly, to fear God.' Is this an adequate summary of the path the character of Emilio takes?

Yes. There's an idea in the story that I really liked, that the Church gives a view of God as a "kind and loving deity". But Emilio, after going through such harrowing experiences, supposes that maybe God isn't such deity. That maybe God isn't really listening. Considering I have a Roman Catholic background, that's powerful stuff.


(4) Why were Emilio's hands cut? Is there a metaphor to be found in this act?

That's an easy one. It's a ironic take on the Crucifixion.

(7) Personally, I find the characters in The Sparrow incredibly believable and endearing. Do you agree that without her obvious skill at characterisation, Russell's novel would have been less successful?

Yes. The book isn't really about First Contact, it's about how humans react, whether theists or atheists, when confronted with the inconceivable. For the atheists, it may be indescribable aliens that could drive men mad. For theists, it could be the idea that God is out to get them.

(8) Does the blunt language and portrayal of violence and sexuality jar with the more philosophical and spiritual aspects of the novel?

Actually, stylistically, I think it works to its advantage because it gives both sides fairly well so it kinda bounces off the two motifs against each other. You know, spiritual vs. physical side of the story.

(9) Can a non-religious person fully appreciate the novel?

That depends. Whether a person or not is non-religious or atheistic, it's whether the person can understand the moralistic and philosophical undertones of the story that they can appreciate the novel.

(10) Score the book out of 10!

A 8 or 9. This is one of the few books I read that integrated philosophy/ theology into SF/F very well and made it easily understandable.

Whew! Sorry I couldn't be more controversial in my answers. Mebbe if someone comes up with a statement that I can play devil's advocate, I'll jump in... http://www.sffworld.com/ubb/wink.gif


[This message has been edited by estranghero (edited April 16, 2002).]

[Rob B]

DISCLAIMER-It has been a few years since reading the book...

1) C'mon, you know many folks look down their nose at Science Fiction! They wanted a wider audience.

2) I think she absolutely is successful at using this technique. The tension between what the preist goes through on Rukhat (Sp?) and back on Earth play of each other pretty well.

4.) I think his hands were cut to symbolize Christ's wounds from being nailed to the cross.

5.) Not really, but I'm not much of a stickler for that anyway.

6.) It differs in that Religion is such a strong issue. (though I haven't read Blish's A Case for Conscience, I think the first contact there involved a priest). The only other 'first contact' novel I've read that touches upon religion is Sagan's thought provoking Contact.

7.) From what I remember the characters were believable.

8.) The language, violence and sexuality didn't jar too much with me. It was a strong aspect paralleling the strong aspect of faith and religion.

9.) Yes, I enjoyed it and I don't consider myself religious.

10.) 8 out of 10

[Kamakhya]

Ok, my turn.

(1) The Sparrow was originally marketed as a non-genre novel - why do you think this was the case?

Under what genre was it marketed??? This is clearly a Sci-Fi novel, so I go with FitzFlagg's response. It was a ploy to make it more palatable to non-sci-fi fans. http://www.sffworld.com/ubb/smile.gif

(2) Russell uses a complex structure in her novel - switching time frames and character points of view. Does she successfully utilise this technique?

More or less. I have to say that at first it kind of bothered me. However, by the end, I thought the use was brilliant. It enabled the book to (a) add a lot of suspence (what made this wreck of a man?) and (b) emphasize the fall of Emilio.

(3) Emilio '...had discovered the outermost limit of faith and, in doing so, had located the exact boundary of despair. It was at that moment that he learned, truly, to fear God.' Is this an adequate summary of the path the character of Emilio takes?

This is a tough question. On the one hand, it seemed as if Emilio was pushed so hard that he lost his faith. On the other hand, the last two pages make clear that he was a sort of Job character (which Russell mentions in the text) and that he would eventually find his faith again.

(4) Why were Emilio's hands cut? Is there a metaphor to be found in this act?

I really enjoyed the explanation given in the book. The beautiful, yet useless vines. Emilio became a pretty, but useless entity. What an intense, yet understandable explanation. This is akin to the foot binding of Chinese women or the corseting on Victorian women. In a way, this was the emasculating of Emilio.

The use of his hands emulates the crucifiction too, but I think the limiting of his abilities far more important.

(5) Russell is a trained, multi-disciplined scientist and uses areas of knowledge in The Sparrow that aren't normally considered the domain of SF (such as anthropology, geology, economics etc). Has this changed your opinion of what the Science in 'Science Fiction' can mean?

No. LeGuin uses her knowledge of anthropolgy and physical science in her novels too. I have a B.A. in Anthropology and one in Sociology. This is my favorite kind of story! http://www.sffworld.com/ubb/smile.gif All too often, Sci-Fi authors have no idea of how to present culture from a completely different context. This story was just so cool from an anthropologist's point of view. A culture where the eaten were sentient. Wow. By having the team meet the food first really sunk the point home when it was finally brought to light at the end of the book. Brilliant.

(6) The Sparrow is, in many ways, a traditional First Contact novel. In what ways does it differ to other similiar books?

Often, first contacts are with the dominate species, or even more commonly, the dominant species is the only sentient species on the planet. This book broke those boundaries.

(7) Personally, I find the characters in The Sparrow incredibly believable and endearing. Do you agree that without her obvious skill at characterisation, Russell's novel would have been less successful?

Her creation of the culture of Rakhat is stunning. I was disappointed not to see more. I think the ideas could have carried the book, but, you are right, her choice of characters and the development of them was superb.

(8) Does the blunt language and portrayal of violence and sexuality jar with the more philosophical and spiritual aspects of the novel?

Oh no. They were essential to the story. Emilio took a fall and to do that it necessitated the most extreme of measures. This was a study in the endurance of faith. How far could Emilio be pushed? From the extacy of love to the depths of hell. To be raped by God was a powerful image.

(9) Can a non-religious person fully appreciate the novel?

I am not particularly religious and certainly not Christian, though I am into the study of religion and mysticism. The use of Jesuits was perfect. Jesuits are a world apart from traditional Christians like the Qabalasists are from Judaic.

Job is an interesting Christian tale and this story explores it in a whole new way.

When I first read this question, I was sure you got it wrong...you must have meant, Can a religious person fully appreciate the novel. But upon thinking about it, I see this point of view. Emilio is shown that God is cruel and He will test you to the limits. He overcomes the test and begins to rebuild himself.

This book displayed a culture much like our own, but with one small difference...that their food is sentient.

What does this mean to a religion that exalts sentience? Supposedly Man has control over all species on Earth. But what if our food could talk back to us? Would we do the same thing? Would we force our food into servitude and humiliation? Is their culture really that much different than our own? These are the kind of questions that would perplex a Christian as much as an atheist.

(10) Score the book out of 10!

I give it a 9. It is close to perfect, but not quite there. Some of the passages bored me and seemed drawn out.

All in all, this was one of the most exciting and thought provoking books I have read in a long time. The characters were believable and heartfelt, the plot was engaging and the ending blew me away. It is a far cry from A Case of Conscience, which I was not too thrilled with.

Thank you Vortex for sharing it.

[This message has been edited by Kamakhya (edited April 17, 2002).]

[vortexreader]

I don't have time to add my thoughts at the moment but I just want to thank the three of you who have responded so far. Your opinions are exceptionally well thought out and have added another dimension to my appreciation of this book...and given me a lot to think about. Thank you!

[vortexreader]

(1) The Sparrow was originally marketed as a non-genre novel - why do you think this was the case?
I really wish I could say that it was because the publisher wanted to take SF to a broader audience but I doubt that was the case. More likely, because of the absence of 'hardware' I think the publishers were worried that the book wouldn't appeal to the normal SF readership.

(2) Russell uses a complex structure in her novel - switching time frames and character points of view. Does she successfully utilise this technique?
I think this is a very difficult technique to employ successfully...but Russell does so remarkably well. I read a lot outside of SF as well and this technique is used quite often but rarely so well.

(4) Why were Emilio's hands cut? Is there a metaphor to be found in this act?
I've found the answers to this question that suggest this act can be seen as a metaphor for the crucifixion intriguing. I hadn't come to that conclusion myself. Perhaps simplistically, I'd only seen the mutiliation of Emilio as a dehumanising act. What sort of 'man' is a man that can't use his own hands? So much of what makes mankind a success is related to that opposable thumb of ours...without this refinement aren't we, in some way, nothing more than animals?

[vortexreader]

5) Russell is a trained, multi-disciplined scientist and uses areas of knowledge in The Sparrow that aren't normally considered the domain of SF (such as anthropology, geology, economics etc). Has this changed your opinion of what the Science in 'Science Fiction' can mean?

Well, it hasn't changed my perception of what can be called SF but it does remind me of how limited traditional SF can be. It doesn't have to be all spaceships and nanomachines...there are many other areas of science that writers could explore. The lack of detail regarding the ship in The Sparrow didn't bother me...the hardware was never meant to be the focus. Actually, I thought Russell covered the relativistic effects of near speed of light travel very succinctly...you didn't need a degree to be able to comprehend it.

[vortexreader]

7) Personally, I find the characters in The Sparrow incredibly believable and endearing. Do you agree that without her obvious skill at characterisation, Russell's novel would have been less successful?
The Sparrow would be nothing, a non-event, if it wasn't for the characters Russell has created. I think good characterisation is often lacking in SF and makes otherwise interesting premises uninteresting. This isn't the case here. The only other character in SF that I can think of that is created with so much detail, depth and compassion is Paul Atreides.

[vortexreader]

(9) Can a non-religious person fully appreciate the novel?
I'm not only non-religious, I'm anti-religion but that didn't stop me from enjoying this aspect of the novel. In fact, I found Emilio's faith (and subsequent questioning of that faith) very moving...the novel would be nothing without this.

(10) Score the book out of 10!
A definite 9/10 for me (I don't believe there's such thing as a 10/10). I enjoyed it as much the second time around as the first...repeat enjoyment has to mean something!



[This message has been edited by vortexreader (edited May 02, 2002).]

[Kamakhya]

Vortexreader said:

I'm not only non-religious, I'm anti-religion but that didn't stop me from enjoying this aspect of the novel. In fact, I found Emilio's faith (and subsequent questioning of that faith) very moving...the novel would be nothing without this.

Whew...for a while I thought I was going to offend you. People can get rather touchy about religion.

I enjoyed Anne's perpetual arguments with Emilio over the nature of faith and God. In particular, how they dealt with the horrors one can face in life. I loved how Mary Russell took on both sides of the religious argument and made both seem reasonable and highly personal. I loved how she pointed out the fallibility of priests, it made them so much more human than they are often portrayed.

I am somewhat anti-religious, but this book portrayed christianity in a very realistic manner. Russell made Emilio a lovable character and she worked hard to make the reader understand his faith. It was not preachy like some authors, but it also was not antagonistic like Morrow's works. I am still trying to decide if Russell's underlying philosophy is pro or anti christianity. On the one hand, she seems to work through Emilio's trauma and maintain his faith (at the end) and on the other, she created a situation that is about as shocking as possible for a christian.

All in all, The Sparrow is one of the best books I have ever read. It was incredibly thought provoking. I will have to track down the sequel. Interestingly enough, this is also one book I would absolutely have never picked up on my own.