On this date in 1775, the Continental Congress founded the Continental Navy (meaning, rather oddly, that by the usual count the Navy is older than the Republic.)
Here's to another 223 years!
Monday, October 13, 2008
Military Ranks in Science Fiction
Gene Roddenberry allegedly said once that everyone on board the Enterprise should be an officer, because they're all trained astronauts, and that makes them all highly-educated.
Allegedly! I hope it isn't true, because the statement is wrong on several levels at once. The most important level is simply one of function: enlisted people deal with equipment, and officers deal with people. Their job is essentially management. But a military composed entirely of managers is probably not going to work very well.
(As a veteran, Roddenberry should have known this. I honestly have no clue what he was thinking; unless it was simply a matter of tone, rather than of fact. He may simply not have wanted a heirarchical military looming too obtrusively in his 23rd-century utopia.)
This is a very roundabout way of introducing Karen Traviss' new book, Order 66. It's the fourth part of her "Republic Commando" series, which covers the events of the Prequel Series from the point of view of common soldiers.
(Well, kind of common. Common relative to the Jedi and the Sith, anyway.)
A large dose of the fun of the books comes from that difference in perspective. Here's Obi-Wan Kenobi, as seen in the Revenge of the Sith novelization:
He is respected throughout the Jedi Order for his insight as well as his warrior skill. He has become the hero of the next generation of Padawans; he is the Jedi their Masters hold up as a model. He is the being that the Council assigns to their most important missions. He is modest, centered, and always kind.
He is the ultimate Jedi.
And here he is, from the perspective of Order 66's lower ranks:
"Cody might think that the sun shines out of his ear, General, but I think he's a glory-seeker who wastes too many men."
... Which is, to belabor the connection I started this post with, how I imagine a lot of lower-level Enterprise crewmen see Captain Kirk.
Allegedly! I hope it isn't true, because the statement is wrong on several levels at once. The most important level is simply one of function: enlisted people deal with equipment, and officers deal with people. Their job is essentially management. But a military composed entirely of managers is probably not going to work very well.
(As a veteran, Roddenberry should have known this. I honestly have no clue what he was thinking; unless it was simply a matter of tone, rather than of fact. He may simply not have wanted a heirarchical military looming too obtrusively in his 23rd-century utopia.)
This is a very roundabout way of introducing Karen Traviss' new book, Order 66. It's the fourth part of her "Republic Commando" series, which covers the events of the Prequel Series from the point of view of common soldiers.
(Well, kind of common. Common relative to the Jedi and the Sith, anyway.)
A large dose of the fun of the books comes from that difference in perspective. Here's Obi-Wan Kenobi, as seen in the Revenge of the Sith novelization:
He is respected throughout the Jedi Order for his insight as well as his warrior skill. He has become the hero of the next generation of Padawans; he is the Jedi their Masters hold up as a model. He is the being that the Council assigns to their most important missions. He is modest, centered, and always kind.
He is the ultimate Jedi.
And here he is, from the perspective of Order 66's lower ranks:
"Cody might think that the sun shines out of his ear, General, but I think he's a glory-seeker who wastes too many men."
... Which is, to belabor the connection I started this post with, how I imagine a lot of lower-level Enterprise crewmen see Captain Kirk.
Saturday, October 4, 2008
Mobile, Alabama
That's where we are, the ship having pulled into this fine southern town to enjoy the Bayfest concert.
(Personally, I'm not that much of a concert-goer, so I'm enjoying the town itself. There's a marvelous two-story used bookstore, and several southern-style restaurants. Ah, the fried chicken!)
(Personally, I'm not that much of a concert-goer, so I'm enjoying the town itself. There's a marvelous two-story used bookstore, and several southern-style restaurants. Ah, the fried chicken!)
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Twelve Tribes?
Some analogies sound really interesting, but work out to be more trouble than they're worth. For example:
http://www.beliefnet.com/story/236/story_23639_1.html
Beliefnet had the interesting notion that America's political-religious groupings could be divided into twelve coherent groups, like the twelve tribes of ancient Israel. I think that's the rationale, anyway: it's not like they try a direct one-to-one analogy (The Christian Right is the Tribe of Judah, or some such.)
Unfortunately, the only thing that the process really illustrated is that twelve is not a good number to divide America's religious groups into. It turns out seeming arbitrary. Some of the divisions seem forced- what exactly is the difference between the Christian Right and the Heartland Culture Warriors? I'm presumably one or the other, but I can't tell which, and that's a bad sign for a tribe.
Likewise, the smaller groups seem to be arbitrary in their own way. Is "Muslims and Other Faiths" really a coherent group that will have things in common? Are Latinos a religious group in-and-of themselves, distinct from Catholics?
Some ideas just don't work out well. This sounded promising at first, but I'm afraid it works poorly as a political analysis.
http://www.beliefnet.com/story/236/story_23639_1.html
Beliefnet had the interesting notion that America's political-religious groupings could be divided into twelve coherent groups, like the twelve tribes of ancient Israel. I think that's the rationale, anyway: it's not like they try a direct one-to-one analogy (The Christian Right is the Tribe of Judah, or some such.)
Unfortunately, the only thing that the process really illustrated is that twelve is not a good number to divide America's religious groups into. It turns out seeming arbitrary. Some of the divisions seem forced- what exactly is the difference between the Christian Right and the Heartland Culture Warriors? I'm presumably one or the other, but I can't tell which, and that's a bad sign for a tribe.
Likewise, the smaller groups seem to be arbitrary in their own way. Is "Muslims and Other Faiths" really a coherent group that will have things in common? Are Latinos a religious group in-and-of themselves, distinct from Catholics?
Some ideas just don't work out well. This sounded promising at first, but I'm afraid it works poorly as a political analysis.
WorldMapper
worldmapper.org is a site devoted to demographic maps. That is, instead of maps based on physical geography, they base the size of various nations on a give factor- population, income, religion, or what have you.
The religion maps are particularly interesting. Here's the world map oriented by Christian population:
http://www.worldmapper.org/display_religion.php?selected=554
... which is almost normal-looking.
The map oriented by Islam:
http://www.worldmapper.org/display_religion.php?selected=564
...in which North and South America shrink virtually out of existence, and Africa balloons to enormous size.
Oriented by atheism:
http://www.worldmapper.org/display_religion.php?selected=582
... Which is basically Planet China.
There's a lot more stuff there, all of it interesting.
The religion maps are particularly interesting. Here's the world map oriented by Christian population:
http://www.worldmapper.org/display_religion.php?selected=554
... which is almost normal-looking.
The map oriented by Islam:
http://www.worldmapper.org/display_religion.php?selected=564
...in which North and South America shrink virtually out of existence, and Africa balloons to enormous size.
Oriented by atheism:
http://www.worldmapper.org/display_religion.php?selected=582
... Which is basically Planet China.
There's a lot more stuff there, all of it interesting.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
