Moralising and logistics

  • 2 Replies
  • 752 Views

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Callan S.

  • *
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • Warrior-Profit
  • Posts: 654
    • View Profile
    • Philosopher Gamer
« on: June 22, 2016, 08:33:49 pm »
Kind of a meta question again : If being moral (some kind of moral, atleast!) is something kind of rented rather than owned, paid for with resources (ie, giving to others is a kind of morality - but you have to have something to give to do that), traditional writing seems to involve chiding this or that action as being wrong or questionable - but this style of writing seems to assume that as long as the bad habits are pruned off, that's all that's needed. As if nothing about logistics needs be said, just something that might get in the way of logistics. Which makes sense given for millenia we were all doing the same old things, agriculture and livestock and it was people sleeping with other peoples spouses or starting wars and such was the thing that got in the way. So story writing isn't about agriculture and livestock back then because everyone does it already and knows it like the back of their hand and don't want to hear about it. Logistics just doesn't have a tradition in story telling.

But now - well, people will vote for what they think will get them jobs. Ie, people need jobs to get food and shelter because they don't at all control their own food supply, so it's easy enough to control voting by controlling food supply. Never mind how people will close mindedly lock on to an idiology if their bread and butter depends on it - the less control they have of their own food supply, the more closed minded folks get (probably scientifically provable, that). It seems there are strong moral issues inside of logistics, but writing has no tradition of logistics - it's all this interpersonal drama like who is sleeping with whom, who is angry at whom. All the things that, yes, used to get in the way of a functioning community - but now are peripheral with regard to how that community is being manipulated from external sources.

Where is genre going when it doesn't address logistics? And I mean a hands dirty address of logistics - actually talking about food production as part of the story. Not just writing about how Johnny is skiving at the back of the shed and should get back to work/yet again some pruning of abberant behavior, but instead the actual steps of production in story, how it can be re-implemented and the political upshot of having more control of food supply. Where's genre going when it avoids this?
« Last Edit: June 22, 2016, 08:40:41 pm by Callan S. »

Cū'jara-Cinmoi

  • *
  • Moderator
  • Momurai
  • *****
  • Posts: 107
    • View Profile
    • R. Scott Bakker
« Reply #1 on: June 23, 2016, 01:24:57 am »
Sounds like you've found your calling, Callan!

Systems thinking is always going to be too hard of a sell, I think, at least of the kind you and I think are required. This is why for me, the important thing is to make people suspicious of atavisms.

Callan S.

  • *
  • Old Name
  • *****
  • Warrior-Profit
  • Posts: 654
    • View Profile
    • Philosopher Gamer
« Reply #2 on: June 23, 2016, 04:50:47 am »
Welp, I'm boned then - whatever chips I have are on systems re-implimentation before you can consistently approach the moral issues your books raise. That and I'm basically advocating an atavism with advocating some amount of return to personal farming!

Upside is I just need to sell it enough to get the system model across, along with it's proposed features, for it to be grasped in principle. In terms of actual adoption of the model (or a modified version of it), that's not my purview. Just throwing the devices before feet.