The basic problem of the story is fairly simple. The goal is to work out how a society beset by isolation and economic contradictions generates cohesion; the answer the powers that be decide upon, with a helpful dose of Historical Necessity, is war. War is invoked as a binding agent to glue together the Empire of Toromon, and the story works out the consequences.
The issues I have then are as follows.
Toromon is an ancient post apocalyptic empire ruled by a monarchy and founded on the production of fish.
However, the characters really don't feel like they inhabit a hierarchy. The central problem of the novel revolves around reconciling the contradictions between the mode of production and the social hierarchy: namely the industrial production of foodstuffs as managed by an industrial bourgeoisie, and the interests of the centralised monarchic system. As is stated, "'[b]etween matter-transmission, tetron power, hydroponics, and aquatics, Toromon has enough scientific potential to provide food, housing, rewarding and creative labour for its whole population, and as well to reach out and touch the stars'" (377). If this is as big a problem as the story makes out, then we would expect a tension around rigidly hierarchical social relations, and the abundance of resources (of overproduction), but seemingly everyone in the story feels free to flit between and amongst all the differing classes, and there is only meagre nods to code switching or any discomfort. Its hard to even really to hold the characters at the same time as their supposed social standing (royalty, to wealthy, to destitute, to slaves).
"'And the second thing I thought was, she comes from the Pot, I come from the hub, and there's a whole set of morals and customs that keeps us apart from one another...' " (324).
"'You know,' Jon said, 'I guess I have to be hit over the head with something before it takes.'
'How do you mean.'
'I was thinking about what I said to you about customs and morals keeping people apart, making them different from one another. People are so much more alike than different. So much more'" (331).
As per the above quotes, the ease of translation does seem to be a deliberate choice, but its not one I agree with.
Fundamentally I don't think the narrative earns its conspicuous lack of labour organisation, its lack of even a hint of genuine, conscious class struggle. The issue with Toromon is the overproduction of food and people, the immiseration of the worker, the stratification of society. Fertile ground for a communist analysis. I think it's fairly infantilising to presume nobody had thought about the shape of society before (the empire is supposedly ancient), or had done quasi-Marxist inquiries into political economy and the nature of value (the industrial system responsible for the accelerated contradictions is decades old). The malcontents in the novel are largely incoherent, and driven by atavistic urge to destruction, all until the last part of the final book, at which point some members of the malcontents engage in a dropout fantasy. Its fairly obvious that the distribution of wealth is the contradiction plaguing Toromon; that is to say, a problem of alienation actively produced to preserve its hierarchy. A communal system of working the needs of society would have no such fatal tension, but this could not preserve the monarchy. To preserve the monarchy it is necessary to expunge superfluous people and resources, that is to keep people trapped withing the social relations that constitute the actual body of the monarchy. Hence the war.
The extraterrestrial Manichean metaplot is strained, probably mostly due to its inherent weaknesses, even considering its hedging at the end. Its not really much to work with nor does it add anything to the story but disorientation, which I experienced throughout, but especially in the opening chapters. Around the war this disorientation is to good effect, but as a way to structure the plot it really just comes across as schlocky. It undercuts the themes of social contradictions elaborated above, and for little payoff.
Finally,
"Ultimately, the social traumas that cause war are those which promote the greatest isolation of the greatest number of individuals that still keep them in physical proximity. Disaster, famine, insupportable distribution of goods, exploitation, increased population till enough individuals are denied the opportunity of being together, fulfilling their yearning towards oneness with all other individuals" (402).
The above is a neat theory, but not one that really holds up, I don't think, to examples of communal violence. It is not Othering that is called out here, but isolation, and I feel that misses the mark.
That all being said, this is Delany, so the language itself is worthy of reflection. No one writes quite like him, and I'd say this was a worthwhile read given my researches into SciFi at present. It's definitely tensions like the ones explored here that I too want to explore, though with a different sensibility: I am uninterested in early Delany schlock, and probably incapable of late Delany headiness. I admire his ability to draw upon a colourful cast of characters, something I am at the moment incapable of doing.