Wednesday, June 16, 2010

Beggars in Spain - Nancy Kress

My appreciation for short fiction is a relatively recent thing. I used to prefer novels but after reading a few collections a couple of years back I have been paying more attention to short fiction. One of the collections that drew my attention was Nano Comes to Clifford Falls and Other Stories by Nancy Kress. I've been meaning to read more of her work ever since reading that book in 2008 but so far I have not made much progress. A few more short stories and one of her more recent novels, Steal Across the Sky. For my next attempt to get better acquainted with her work, I picked one of Kress' better know novels, Beggars in Spain. The novella this book expands upon won Kress both the Nebula and Hugo awards in 1991 and 1992 respectively. The novel deals with some pretty disturbing views on society making it an interesting but not necessarily comfortable read.

Leisha Camden is one of the first people whose parents have opted for what is believed to be a huge step forward in genetics. Her genetic material has been extensively altered but the most striking alteration is in the fact Leisha does not need to sleep. As a side effect of this alteration she is also unusually intelligent and psychologically stable. In the same treatment a second egg is fertilized. Leisha's sister Alice does not have the same genetic improvements and is in effect an unwanted by product. As Leisha grows up to be a promising lawyer, Alice is mostly ignored by her father. A situation that reflects a number of developments in society at large.

Early in the twenty-first century a new and clean power source becomes available that dramatically changes the world's economy. Patents on this invention makes the US enormously rich. At the same time a generation of bright, sleepless citizens in maturing ready to take advantage of their superior education and skills. Unfair competition the sleepers feel. Hatred and jealousy flare as society splits in a class of productive, rich and intelligent class and a class who's empty lives are supported by a minority an decreasing minority. Not a situation people on either side of the divide are happy with.

This reprint edition includes an introduction by Kress in which she explains something of her influences. Normally I am tempted to skip the introduction but this one is very enlightening. Kress uses ideas of Ayn Rand and Ursula K. Le Guin, in particular those expressed in her novel The Dispossessed. I have read neither Rand nor The Dispossessed (that last I mean to change sometime soon) but what I have read about Rand and Le Guin was enough to see some these influences. It might be interesting to read all three if you consider picking up this book. I'm not entirely sure I can overcome my hesitation to try Rand myself though.

Part of the novel relies pretty heavily on an ideology based on Rand's Objectivism. She does this in the guise of the teachings of Yagaiism, a school of thinking advocated by Kenzo Yagai, inventor of the cheap Y-energy (John Galt anyone?). It links dignity to what an individual can achieve through his or her own effort and that (voluntary) contract is the basis for society to operate. To put (part of) in in the words of Yagai himself:
"No, the only dignity, the only spirituality, rests on what a man can achieve with his own efforts. To rob a man of his chance to achieve, and to trade what he achieves with others, is to rob him of his spiritual dignity as a man. This is why communism failed in our time. All coercion - all force to take from a man his own efforts to achieve - causes spiritual damage and weakens a society. Conscription, theft, fraud, violence, welfare, lack of legislative representation - all rob a man of his chance to choise, to achieve on his own, to trade the results of his own achievements with others. Coercion is a cheat. It produces nothing new. Only freedom - the freedom to achieve, the freedom to trade freely the results of achievement - creates the environment proper to the dignity and spirituality of man."
Book One - Leisha 2008 - Chapter 3
The some of the highly productive and increasingly threatened Sleepless are great believers in this philosophy. Combined with their increasing isolation, in most cases of their own choosing, a head on collision with a society where an huge part of the population is basically living of what a minority produces, appears inevitable. Where Leisha and Alice come to some sort of solution of the problems in their relationship, there seems to be no fix for what ails US society. I thought the rift in society was portrayed very much in terms of absolutes. Especially in later parts of the novel everybody seems to be either highly talented and absurdly productive, or a lazy, uneducated leech of society.

I must admit my reaction to the book is coloured in part by my dislike of Objectivism. I think the idea too extreme to be practical, especially on a planet as densely populated as ours. To an extend, it also fails to take into account the fact that people are social animals, which means dealing with people even when you don't want to or feel they are not entitled to your consideration. What really bothers me about it though, it not so much the idea itself, but the extremes to which some of its supporters seems to take it. Frankly, some of the things proposed based on Objectivist thinking make for disturbing future. A future that could very well hold some elements of the conflict described in Beggars in Spain.

Fuelling this movement is the side of society that lives of welfare without contributing anything. These people are described as a group that is quite happy to take what the government offers, and it offers a lot in the prosperous late twenty-first century USA. It kills any curiosity or drive they may have had to improve their lot or develop their talents. This is a well known criticism of welfare systems and one not entirely without merit but the extend to which this phenomenon is displayed in this book is hard to believe. These two elements and the way they feed on each other in the book makes for disturbing reading in several places in the story. Which, all things considered, shows how powerful Kress' writing can be.

Impressive this clash of ideas may be, for me the part of the novel that deals with the relationship between Leisha and her sister Alice is more interesting. Especially early on in the novel when the two are growing up and growing apart, Kress manages to create a very intimate view of what it is the be Sleepless and how much of a benefit this modification is and what this does to Alice's personality. We see most of it through Leisha's eyes. Especially the young Leisha does not seem to be capable of fully understanding the burden the inevitable comparison to her brilliant sister is for Alice. They are two wonderfully contrasting characters.

There is plenty of food for thought in this book. I've only covered some of the ideas covered in the book and barely touched upon the applications of genetic manipulation that are mentioned in the story. It was not a very comfortable read for me though. The way Kress describes a lot of these issues is pretty confronting I suppose and rarely in a way I agree with. Kress meant this as an exploration of ideas and not so much a statement of what is right in her eyes so don't let this put you off. Beggars in Spain is a thought-provoking read, one that will make you reconsider your own convictions. There are two more novels in this series. I'm curious to see where Kress intends to take all this in Beggars and Choosers and Beggars Ride.

Book Details
Title: Beggars in Spain
Author: Nancy Kress
Publisher: Eos
Pages: 400
Year: 2004
Language: English
Format: Mass Market Paperback
ISBN: 978-0-06-073348-3
First published: 1993

4 comments:

  1. I believe you mean The Dispossessed, not The Disposed.

    ReplyDelete
  2. "I must admit my reaction to the book is coloured in part by my dislike of Objectivism. I think the idea too extreme to be practical, especially on a planet as densely populated as ours. To an extend, it also fails to take into account the fact that people are social animals, which means dealing with people even when you don't want to or feel they are not entitled to your consideration. What really bothers me about it though, it not so much the idea itself, but the extremes to which some of its supporters seems to take it. Frankly, some of the things proposed based on Objectivist thinking make for disturbing future. A future that could very well hold some elements of the conflict described in 'Beggars in Spain'."

    One finds at the base of all the choices one makes in the pursuit of life fundamental alternatives: life v. death, health v. sickness, true v. false, right v. wrong. In which of these is an extreme not the ultimate and perpetual goal? In which of these would your life be enhanced by compromising or sacrificing that extreme to the other? The error that is your fear of extreme ideas is your acceptance of the assertions of others that there is no such thing as absolute truths — a conviction that you no doubt hold as an absolute.

    And since when does the absolutism of a truth depend on the population of the earth. What are the mechanics of that conclusion? And since when would the extremes that some advocates of a philosophy would take in attempting to apply it have anything at all to do with its validity? Ideas stand or fall only on their own merit.

    Your fear prevents you from discovering the fundamental (extreme) alternative underlying all human social interaction: freedom v. force. Since man by nature survives and thrives by the application of reason to action in the service of his life, everyone requires, above all, absolute freedom in that pursuit while acknowledging the implicit corollary of his own necessity: that he grant the same to all other men. Thus Rand identified the trader principle that removes coercion from human interaction, the principle that:

    no person shall initiate the use of physical force or threat thereof to gain, withhold, or destroy any tangible or intangible value of any other person who either created it or acquired it in a voluntary exchange.

    When all men are equally free and all exchanges are required to be voluntary, only then can we deal with each other because of that which we value in them and in spite of that which we do not. That is the formula for peace and harmony that you will not find elsewhere but in Objectivism. It is time that you quit uttering idle opinions about something you utterly misunderstand. But I warn you that to rectify that entails an enormous amount of reading, redefining, and reintegrating of your treasure chest of knowledge — do not just read Atlas Shrugged and The Fountainhead and process them with your past assumptions. As Objectivist blogger Jeff Montgomery said:

    "However, I also don’t hold non-Objectivists to the same philosophical standard as those who have been studying the philosophy by itself for an extended period of time. Even some alleged Objectivists don’t understand her philosophy, and apply it poorly. It is deceptively simple, yet actually profound, and confounds anyone who views it through the lens of common premises and colloquial definitions."

    ReplyDelete
  3. I didn't intend to write a thorough text on my opinion of Objectivism. I was merely pointing out that my opinion of it influenced how I see this book. It is a review of Beggars in Spain after all, not one of Rand's work. The reasons for me not agreeing with some Objectivist positions don't really matter to the review so I didn't elaborate on them.

    I do think you have touched upon the reason why I am not all that eager to try Rand's novels. I can't really approach those novels with a completely open mind and I am pretty sure that given my personal views on the matter, these books would annoy the hell out of me. Generally not a good state of mind to appreciate their literary qualities.

    ReplyDelete