|
Muse
Sept 18, 2005 22:00:24 GMT -5
Post by Kilarin on Sept 18, 2005 22:00:24 GMT -5
I've been anxiously awaiting for my dead trees copy of "Muse" to arrive. It showed up Friday, just in time for me to take it on a weekend trip the wife and I were planning. First a word about the binding. I must say, the "Print on Demand" paperback was done very nicely. The format was professional, and the binding held up quite well to being dragged around all weekend. I've purchased paperbacks at the book store that started falling apart on the first read, but DiskUs and CafePress produced a product that I think will last a long time. So, again, I can heartily recommend doing business with Diskus, they always seem to satisfy. Ah, but binding is only of secondary importance. What really matters is the story, and here the book comes through with shining colors. I didn't want to put it down. Mr. Farris does an EXCELLENT job of pulling you deep into the characters lives. The format is unusual, but works very well. Every odd numbered chapter is from the humans viewpoint, and every even number chapter drops you into the mind of the muse. Jim does an Excellent job of getting you to understand, empathize with, and like the human character, but where he really excels is with the Muse. The Muse is as intelligent as a human, and has a personality largely modeled after ours, BUT, they are different. What would it be like to have been DESIGNED to serve? To have single minded devotion built into the neural pathways of your brain? To be a slave, who doesn't feel like a slave, because you've been designed to WANT to serve? I'm doing a very inadequate job of explaining the mindset of a Muse, but the book does an exceptional one. This is one of the hardest things for an author to do, can they drop you into a brain that doesn't work like yours, and manage to help you understand that very different point of view, not from the outside, but from the INSIDE. Jim Farris manages to do this with incredible skill. The story is a detective novel, a science fiction story, and, in a very unusual way, sort of a romance. The world is interesting, the characters are fascinating, and I find myself wishing I had already purchased book two of the series so that I could start on it tonight. (A failure which I intend to remedy at once!) I DO hope that the cover art you have been showing us here implies the 3rd book in the series is close to completion! Thank you Xaa, another incredible book. And now, I've got something I can lone out and attempt to hook others into your books.
|
|
|
Muse
Sept 19, 2005 15:46:35 GMT -5
Post by Xaa on Sept 19, 2005 15:46:35 GMT -5
First a word about the binding. The binding will last. The only problem I have ever had with CafePress is the little plastic laminate they put to protect the cover - it sometimes peels up at the edges. To fix, just cover the long edge with a bit of Scotch Tape. Bear in mind HOW they get this to happen. They don't do it through some sort of quasi-mystical brain-washing, they use root insincts. Love (just as with humans), and Visual Imprinting (like happens in many animals). Mmmm... You're reading too much into that. She's in love - that does most of it. Not near completion, but is being worked on. Detective stories are the hardest to write. They're a sort of magic trick - you, the author, know what's happening, but you need to make sure the reader doesn't figure out the same in the first chapter. This means structuring the story in such a way so that the clues are carefully placed, leading to the moment when it all comes together and the answer is revealed. I am glad you enjoyed the work. Now there's a thought.
|
|
|
Muse
Sept 19, 2005 16:28:45 GMT -5
Post by Kilarin on Sept 19, 2005 16:28:45 GMT -5
Kilarin:Xaa: But, she was designed, as you point out, at the deep instinctual level, to love her owner. She's in love by design. It brings up interesting questions, because a child falls in love with it's parents at an instinctual level as well, and we don't consider that coersive. Heck, a good deal of the ordinary adult "love" is instinctual. BUT, we know we have a choice. Humans CAN choose not to love, despite their instincts. Can a Muse choose not to love her master, despite the instincts? It's an important question to my mind, because it lies at the root of their free will. How much do they really have? I'm sure I'll learn more in the next book (Which is already ordered, by the way.) Again I thank you for writing a book that makes me THINK about things like instict, freewill, and love, and how they are all tied together.
|
|
|
Muse
Sept 20, 2005 4:15:48 GMT -5
Post by cypherwulfe on Sept 20, 2005 4:15:48 GMT -5
Kilatin, I think I have to disagree with what you just said. I personally feel that you can choose perhaps to ignore feelings like love, but you cannot choose who/what you love. Maybe its naive of me to think that, but hey, having finally finished my divorce, and finally gotten the papers..... I wonder if it was the right thing. I love my ex completely, always will I think, just decided to ignore it, because sheobviously doesnt love me.. bleh
And as far as the issue with Liz and other Muses being slaves. First, remember that the people who get a Muse have to pass a Psych eval, that is greater than one you have ever even heard of on a large order of magnitude. IE, one that actually works. The people who sell and regialte sell of Muses have strict guidelines to get one. So it isnt like you are just walking in, and your little 5 year old who cant feed his fish is busy yellign abotu wanting a Muse. The society makes sure that the person buying hte Muse is psychologically capable of caring for one.
now, I personally dont see a problem with the way the Muses are taught, or however you want to lable it, to love and sere the person who buys them. I liken it to how the Pandora's Box AI's are created. hte baseline Matrix is to more or less, serve and protect humans. Now, htey dont really have a choice. they are bound by very strict guidelines, and even the NAD, who can harm humans BTW, are forced to follow thier programming. This makes me look at the Muse as a Sophant, a being deserving to be called sentient and alive. There is a very symbiotic relationship I feel at work here, much like the AI and humans/replicants of PB have. The muse provides companionship and love and help to the person they are bound to, and the master provides security, house and herth, and also companionship.
Somewhere there is a point in all taht rambling.. hehe
guess I should try to make my thoughts more linear. Ahh well, hope it all makes sense.
|
|
|
Muse
Sept 20, 2005 7:05:39 GMT -5
Post by Kilarin on Sept 20, 2005 7:05:39 GMT -5
cypherwulfe: Nah, you came through just fine. cypherwulfe: That's a very valid point. Lets leave it at "humans can choose to ignore love", as they obviously do. They question would be, can a Muse choose to ignore love for her owner? The PsychEval makes this less of an issue, since in generally ensures that the owner is a loveable person, but what if the owner changes? What if something happened to the owner and they responded by doing something horrible. Of course, the PsychEval may anticipate such events and weed out most individuals who's current mental state could be rendered unstable by some external event. Anyway, I didn't mean to make it sound like I was convinced the Muse's situation was a bad one. I'm not. Which is why I found the book so facinating. Normally I would have considered a creature who was designed to be loyal to be enslaved. But the Muse, as Xaa points out, isn't bound against her will, she is bound THROUGH her will. She loves her owner. To her this love seems completely natural, actually, it IS natural. She wouldn't let anyone change it if they could. And answering the question of, "Does it matter if her love was designed", forces us to face some VERY interesting questions about what makes US fall in love, and about the very nature of free will. Like I said, GOOD BOOK!
|
|
|
Muse
Sept 20, 2005 21:52:25 GMT -5
Post by Xaa on Sept 20, 2005 21:52:25 GMT -5
But, she was designed, as you point out, at the deep instinctual level, to love her owner. She's in love by design. If you remember from the third chapter (Alan's second visit to the Biotronics store), she would have fallen for whoever she saw first, like a duckling. This is pretty clearly spelled out - and her feelings towards Alan are explored by the character herself as she goes on through the first and second book. It's important to remember that her brain is, basically, a very sophisicated biotechnological product, and is essentially an extremely sophisticated version of a parrot's brain. Some things are going to be easier to do, simply because the design allows for it. Having a muse love her owner is a plus, not a minus. And, as Liz herself eventually concludes, what sparked the love doesn't make it any less real. Mmmmm... Going to have to disagree with this one. My personal experience is that love isn't something you can choose - it's a pretty raw emotion (like fear or jealousy). You can't just turn it off. Though you can desensitize yourself to it, this only leads to serious psychological problems down the road. Our brains are made to love - love is what keeps us from killing our children when they take the car-keys and scrawl their name into the side of our brand-new car. It's a pro-survival emotion, like fear and jealousy, and as such, our brains are pretty much hardwired for it. [sidebar] Yes, jealousy is pro-survival - it all boils down to genetics, and the drive to pass on your genes. You are jealous because the person of your jealousy is spending time with someone else. Sibling Rivalry is normal - those who allow their siblings to hog all the parent's attention will get more food, better clothing, and have a better chance at survival. This may not seem relevant today in a world where there's probably a fast-food joint less than three minutes from you in your car, but wind the clock back a few thousand years and you can see that anyone who has even a slight advantage has a better chance of surviving and passing on their genes, which enhances the tendency towards jealousy in the descendants. Another example: Being jealous of your spouse kissing someone else should be so butt-obvious from a genetic perspective it doesn't bear mentioning, but we'll mention it anyway. If you are female with children in the Stone Age and your spouse leaves you for someone else more attractive, this reduces your chance for survival, since now you still have children to care for but nobody going out to hunt. If you are male and your mate chooses to have sex with another man who's stronger/more handsome/etc than you are to increase the chances her children will have good genes and a greater chance for survival, her actions have reduced the chance that your own genes will be passed on - thus, those male who jealously guard their mates and grow furious (or even abusive) at the possibility of cuckoldry actually have traits that increase the chances their genes will be passed on to the next generation, reinforcing this emotion in the children. Bottom line: Jealousy is an extremely raw emotion, we can spot it in anything that has a measurable forebrain from birds on up, and it's a pro-survival emotion, like Love and Fear, so it's not going away. [/sidebar] Nope. They're like a duckling, in that regard. They imprint on whomever they spot first when they awake. In some cases, just as much as you do - more, really, since the only instincts they have are what their designers gave them, whereas you as a human being are burdened with several bajillion years of instinctual baggage that boils down to the big three imperatives, constantly lurking in the background of your brain: EAT! REPRODUCE! GET BETTER STUFF! In other cases, they don't have the same measure of free will that you do. They have certain blocks built into their brains that are mentioned in the first book - vis-a-vis their inability to lie to the police. This may make it sound like they have no free will at all, but consider that it's mentioned that Cleo handled the police very simpy - she just pretended to be an airhead. You don't have to answer questions you aren't asked. The "why" of this decision is fairly obvious: When you've finally reached the point where you have both the desire and the technology to create intelligent life, you don't want the creatures you create turning into hoodlums and adding to the problems which first made you consider what improvements you could make in the definition of "intelligent life" in the first place. Again, I am glad you enjoyed it.
|
|
|
Muse
Sept 20, 2005 21:55:15 GMT -5
Post by Xaa on Sept 20, 2005 21:55:15 GMT -5
But, she was designed, as you point out, at the deep instinctual level, to love her owner. She's in love by design. If you remember from the third chapter (Alan's second visit to the Biotronics store), she would have fallen for whoever she saw first, like a duckling. This is pretty clearly spelled out - and her feelings towards Alan are explored by the character herself as she goes on through the first and second book. It's important to remember that her brain is, basically, a very sophisicated biotechnological product, and is essentially an extremely sophisticated version of a parrot's brain. Some things are going to be easier to do, simply because the design allows for it. Having a muse love her owner is a plus, not a minus. And, as Liz herself eventually concludes, what sparked the love doesn't make it any less real. Mmmmm... Going to have to disagree with this one. My personal experience is that love isn't something you can choose - it's a pretty raw emotion (like fear or jealousy). You can't just turn it off. Though you can desensitize yourself to it, this only leads to serious psychological problems down the road. Our brains are made to love - love is what keeps us from killing our children when they take the car-keys and scrawl their name into the side of our brand-new car. It's a pro-survival emotion, like fear and jealousy, and as such, our brains are pretty much hardwired for it. [sidebar] Yes, jealousy is pro-survival - it all boils down to genetics, and the drive to pass on your genes. You are jealous because the person of your jealousy is spending time with someone else. Sibling Rivalry is normal - those who allow their siblings to hog all the parent's attention will get more food, better clothing, and have a better chance at survival. This may not seem relevant today in a world where there's probably a fast-food joint less than three minutes from you in your car, but wind the clock back a few thousand years and you can see that anyone who has even a slight advantage has a better chance of surviving and passing on their genes, which enhances the tendency towards jealousy in the descendants. Another example: Being jealous of your spouse kissing someone else should be so butt-obvious from a genetic perspective it doesn't bear mentioning, but we'll mention it anyway. If you are female with children in the Stone Age and your spouse leaves you for someone else more attractive, this reduces your chance for survival, since now you still have children to care for but nobody going out to hunt. If you are male and your mate chooses to have sex with another man who's stronger/more handsome/etc than you are to increase the chances her children will have good genes and a greater chance for survival, her actions have reduced the chance that your own genes will be passed on - thus, those male who jealously guard their mates and grow furious (or even abusive) at the possibility of cuckoldry actually have traits that increase the chances their genes will be passed on to the next generation, reinforcing this emotion in the children. Bottom line: Jealousy is an extremely raw emotion, we can spot it in anything that has a measurable forebrain from birds on up, and it's a pro-survival emotion, like Love and Fear, so it's not going away. [/sidebar] Nope. They're like a duckling, in that regard. They imprint on whomever they spot first when they awake. In some cases, just as much as you do - more, really, since the only instincts they have are what their designers gave them, whereas you as a human being are burdened with several bajillion years of instinctual baggage that boils down to the big three imperatives, constantly lurking in the background of your brain: EAT! REPRODUCE! GET BETTER STUFF! Madison Avenue has made literally trillions of dollars over the years using advertisements that prod those three little urges in the back of our brains, there's really no denying it. In other cases, they don't have the same measure of free will that you do. They have certain blocks built into their brains that are mentioned in the first book - vis-a-vis their inability to lie to the police. This may make it sound like they have no free will at all, but consider that it's mentioned that Cleo handled the police very simpy - she just pretended to be an airhead. You don't have to answer questions you aren't asked. The "why" of this decision is fairly obvious: When you've finally reached the point where you have both the desire and the technology to create intelligent life, you don't want the creatures you create turning into hoodlums and adding to the problems which first made you consider what improvements you could make in the definition of "intelligent life" in the first place. Again, I am glad you enjoyed it. [/quote]
|
|
|
Muse
Sept 20, 2005 22:03:29 GMT -5
Post by Xaa on Sept 20, 2005 22:03:29 GMT -5
Kilatin, I think I have to disagree with what you just said. I personally feel that you can choose perhaps to ignore feelings like love, but you cannot choose who/what you love. I agree. Love isn't something you choose, and it isn't something you can turn on or off. It's too basic an instinct for that. Oh, I could tell you stories on this subject... Wait, no, that's what I do for a living, I may as well write a book on it and get paid instead of tittilatting you for free. Yep. The "why" of it is given in the first book - animal cruelty laws in Alan's day and age. As is mentioned in the second book, you can't even buy a normal dog or cat if you test out as being unstable. This would be because, as the underlying premise goes, biotechnology has reached the dreams of 20th century scientists, and gone beyond them. Far beyond them, in fact, since they're cranking out customizable intelligent life as pets. No, really. Think about it. A muse is basically the final stage of the Tamatagochi. Intelligent, understands your brain and your psychology completely, loves you unequivocally, and is devoted to assisting you in being a happy and successful person. And they're cranked out to the customer's order - they look exactly how you want them to look. Well, within the limitations of physics, at any rate. Although a fairy would be nice, there's no way something the size and weight of a mouse is going to fly on dragonfly wings. And before anyone slaps me down, yes, I am aware that there were dragonflies in ancient times that were eight foot long. They were also as thin as a pencil and had several sets of wings along their body to hold the whole mass aloft. Liz isn't a fantasy creature - the "Muse" series is one of my "hard" sci-fi works, in that there is no magic whatsoever, and everything is based on solid science. If we had the technology, we could build a muse tomorrow. We just don't have the technology - yet. In any event, they aren't guessing at how the brain works in Alan Donovan's day and age, nor do they wonder why people do what they do. They *know* how the brain works, and can map it well enough to build a new brain from scratch, program it with the equivalent of a college professor's knowledge, drop in the skill of a concert pianist, then package it up in a brain-pan barely large enough to hold two peas and ship it off fast enough for Alan to get his pet on monday morning. That's the kind of technology that exists in the world of Alan's day and age. And, if you think about it, this has several other ramifications as to what's possible in his world, too. And a good one, at that - Muses are not slaves, they're muses. Robots in the Pandora's Box universe started out as slaves, but this issue is addressed in the first book.
|
|
|
Muse
Sept 20, 2005 22:11:55 GMT -5
Post by Xaa on Sept 20, 2005 22:11:55 GMT -5
They question would be, can a Muse choose to ignore love for her owner? This is answered clearly in the first book - no, they can't. However, they can choose actions that will not necessarily be beneficial to their owner, but are both legally and morally the right thing to do anyway. This is explained in the scene between Alan, Liz and Chan in the Chinese restaurant. Chan would love to have a Muse of his own - but he can't get one, and even if he fiddled with things to finagle the faked "paperwork" necessary to get one, there's no way a muse would advise and assist a Yakuza Crime Boss - she'd call the cops as soon as she knew what he really did for a living and spill everything she knows. And given their powers of observation, that could be enough to send their owner to jail for a very, very long time. Theoretically, that's precisely what the muse is trying to prevent. Remember, this is like having a professional psychologist sitting on your shoulder, advising you constantly. Your likelyhood of going postal and ending up on the evening news already had to be damn low to get a muse in the first place, and once you have one, the chance you'll go postal drops to zero. Yep. More to the point, borderline cases can be steered away from that possibility by the muses themselves. They are a stabilizing influence, mentally, and are one that affects all walks of life in Donovan's world.
|
|
|
Muse
Sept 21, 2005 7:35:22 GMT -5
Post by Kilarin on Sept 21, 2005 7:35:22 GMT -5
Xaa: I will agree that you can't just "turn it off", but I know SEVERAL couples who are raising their grandchildren because the parents decided that other things were more important than their own children. It's not that they never loved their kids, it's not even that they don't still love them, they just want other things MORE, so they walked away and left gandma and grandad to be responsible for the kids. So I guess I'm not trying to say that you can just "Turn Love Off", but that humans DO have the capacity to decide that something ELSE, money, fame, free time, whatever, is more important than love, and to act on that. As you point out, the Muse can also decide that some of IT'S impulses (such as doing what is morally and legaly right) are more important than love, so I'm not really certain how much difference there is. A Muse is bound to love the first person they see upon waking. But give me a dose of Oxytocin and I'm more likely to trust people. Reduce the levels of Oxytocin and a mother and child will not bond as strongly. Hit my blood stream with enough testosterone, and I will almost certainly become violent. One only has to examine the story of Phineas Gage to confirm that we are not "free" of our own minds. Change the structure of a brain and you make radical changes in the personaility of the person. So, while I'm still not certain it is entirely fair to build "bonding" into a Muse, it's clear that we are ALSO slaves of our brains and glands. The Muse has a set up that does not seem burdensome to them at all, and that puts them ahead of most humans. Xaa: Ya know, I hadn't actually thought of it that way, but it's OBVIOUS from the story of Cleo. THE major goal of every muse is the mental well being of it's owner. So, by their very existance, they make their owners more fit to have a Muse. A VERY symbiotic relationship. Heck, you COULD turn it around and say that the human is the slave. The Muse manipulates and controls the human into providing for, not only their own physical and emotional needs, but even for their own reproduction. I wouldn't be surprised to discover that most Muse owners are single and childless, so the Muse is advancing it's own species at the cost of ours. I wonder how much money and resources go into creating and caring for muses while some humans do without? ha! They are PARASITES! No, I'm not seriously saying that Muses are bad things. Heck, I still want my own! I'm just agreeing that looking at them strictly as "slaves" is an oversimplification. The relationship may not be perfect, but it is symbiotic. Still anxiously awaiting the arrival of "Aura of Indigo"!!!
|
|
|
Muse
Sept 21, 2005 7:45:18 GMT -5
Post by Xaa on Sept 21, 2005 7:45:18 GMT -5
I will agree that you can't just "turn it off", but I know SEVERAL couples who are raising their grandchildren because the parents decided that other things were more important than their own children. Yes, it's often jokingly called the "Cucoo Gene." It's also pro-survival, too. After all, they now have the freedom to have more kids if they want. Actually, this is under debate. It was considered true ever since injectable testosterone has been available for medical purposes. However, some scientists now think that what testosterone really does to your brain is lower your inhibitions (meaning the EAT! REPRODUCE! GET BETTER STUFF! messages are heard louder and more often acted upon). After all, there are many men who sing deep bass, have buckets of testosterone, and don't kick the crap out of their women or children. I'm not precisely certain that having a three-foot seven railroad tamping spike blasted through your skull is precisely the same as saying "I am not going to fall in love with this woman, I have better things to do with my life." However, yes, physical alterations to the brain do sometimes cause personality changes. Read the second book, Alan brushes upon this topic briefly.
|
|
|
Muse
Sept 21, 2005 15:03:35 GMT -5
Post by Kilarin on Sept 21, 2005 15:03:35 GMT -5
Ha! Well yes, when you put it that way. It's in the queue to be printed! Patience, I must have Patience...
|
|