Play Book Tag discussion

2.5 stars.

I guess I didn't get what this book was trying to say. I decided to read it because I read two other novels by the same author - I liked The Crimson Petal and the White, would have even loved it but for the ending!, and loved Under the Skin. So I had high expectations. I don't usually like sci-fi (although Under the Skin could be labelled as such), but I like Faber's writing. Indeed, I've got to say that his books are sort of page-turners for me, I can't stop reading once I've started. This one was just the same.

I need to say that, although I had a religious education (I was brought up a Catholic, just like most of the Italian kids my age), I see myself as an atheist nowadays. That's to say I was a bit worried about the protagonist of this novel being a pastor - I knew there was bound to be heavy emphasis on religion. But I read some of my friends' reviews and saw that even the non-religious ones among them weren't bothered by that, so I was relieved.

I can't exactly say the many references to religion and the Bible bothered me - I'm an atheist, but not of the religion-hater kind (believe me when I say I know many such atheists). I can appreciate references to religion if they are substantial to the plot. And that certainly is the case here. In fact, the whole plot revolves around religion and the protagonist's missionary efforts on a distant planet.

The relationship between Peter, the protagonist, and his wife Bea is also very important. They are incredibly far away, on two different galaxies really, but at first they still seem to be very close to each other, since they love each other deeply. (view spoiler)[This is going to change later on, though. (hide spoiler)]

I appreciate that religion is not the only important theme in the plot: love is another one, relationships, colonialism, etc. But as I said in the beginning, I didn't get what the book was trying to say. I couldn't get a clear picture. I was left dumbfounded. I ultimately have no idea what I've read. I need to read more reviews in order to understand.

Just one last observation: (view spoiler)[the Oasans are deeply religious people, at least the converted ones, and that's understandable because they were originally converted by the first minister, Kurtzberg. But, why bring Kurtzberg to Oasis in the first place? I appreciate that the Oasans were basically in need of a pastor when Kurtzberg disappeared, but why did USIC even think of bringing along a minister in the first place? I just can't understand it. It doesn't seem to be crucial on a space mission. (hide spoiler)]

Last but not least: the ending. Faber seems to like books without an ending. And I don't mean an open ending, I really mean no ending at all. (view spoiler)[Okay, Peter is going home. But what's happened to Bea? What's happened to planet Earth? Why all the catastrophes? What the hell, tell me something about it, Faber! (hide spoiler)]

I didn't like this book nearly as much as The Crimson Petal and the White either. I'm not sure why my rating didn't make it to GR, though.

for me, and I can't speak for the author, my thought was why do we ever want to convert people to one religion or another?

The reason they brought a Pastor on a space mission is because religion is used to control people. Same reason it was brought to Native American's, Maori, Aboriginals, etc. Control and conquer.

I happen to be one of those latter atheists. I REALLY hate religion. My feeling on spirituality in general is you be you ... decide what works for you and go with it. Live a good life, and be an example and perhaps people will want to follow your example. Rather than have somebody tell me that they love God above all else while saying horrible racist things about black people. Sorry for the tangent, but I felt like this book was no different than any other in terms of colonialism. And I thought the creatures were neat. :)

Nicole, I think you're right when you say this book is about colonialism. But I think there's more to it than that, for instance I read some great reviews where the reviewer said it's about the inability to communicate. I agree with that. I feel like I have understood this book a bit more after reading some illuminating reviews. But I still didn't like it.

As for religion, believe me, I have the same feelings as you, I understand 100% what you say about it. Only, I don't see myself as a religion-hater, because I think we all need to find some comfort in something in order to be able to get on with life, and if some people find it in religion, why not? If it works for them, I'm fine with it. I just wish they didn't try to convert me - that I really can't stand. But most of the religious people I know would never do that. Maybe I'm just lucky, lol!

What I wanted to say about the religion-haters, is that I know many people who mock religion, make fun of it, tease religious people, swear just to shock them, are simply aggressive towards religion and religious people. I'm sure you don't fall in this category. I don't like this kind of people because in a way they want to "convert" people to atheism just like the others want to convert them to religion. I respect everybody, I don't need to mock someone else in order to express my beliefs or lack thereof.

agreed

It's good to see some other atheists in this group! I loathe proselytizing, but can't hate religious people as my family is pretty devout (Catholic), and they have been very accepting of my decision to abandon my religious upbringing. Indeed, they hold many similiar views on topics that have steered me towards atheism, and the only difference is that they have kept their faith in a god while I have not.

One of the things in my youth that crystallized my thinking on this path was the science fiction short story "The Streets of Ashkelon" by Harry Harrison. It was the first real blow to the brainwashing that I'd been raised in. Perhaps to a lesser extent also "The Star" by Arthur C. Clarke, but that was not as good. I'm not sure they would fit the tag space opera, though, as they are very narrow in scope.

For me, the book was more about the behavior of the characters in their approach to religion than religion per se. I didn't find them likable but they were interesting. Better to read about them from a distance than meet them in real life.

Great review, Marina, and helpful for my decision making. Like you I loved Crimson Petal and like sci fi so it would be a safe bet. But priests and aliens has been done in some good books, like Russell's "Sparrow" and sequel and Blish's 1958 Hugo winner A Case of Conscience on sale today.for 99 cents at Amazon and B&N. Still, 90% of GR friends rated this 4 or more stars.

Anna, my family is the same. I'm glad to know they accepted and respected your non-religious choice.

Denizen, I agree, I don't think this book is about religion per se. And like you, I wouldn't like to meet these characters in real life...

Michael, I'm glad you liked my review, I actually thought it was pretty badly written. I'll have to check the books you mention, although unfortunately sales on amazon.com and amazon.it are not usually the same.

I loathe overt proselytizing by both religious and non-religious people (proselytize - to convert or attempt to convert (someone) from one religion, belief, or opinion to another.). I have fallen into both camps in my life. I prefer intelligent conversations where people can agree to disagree, but that can be hard to find, and is certainly not something I do online. I prefer to hear logical points and them be able to mull them over on my own so that if they make sense and the assumptions are sound, I can change my opinion quietly. Not that I do that often, but I have before. However, most conversations about important things are fraught with emotion (don't get me wrong, I have plenty of emotions with strong opinions, but don't like those to pour out into discussions.)

As for the religious aspect of this novel, I think that while it's not its main them (colonization is), it is a common type of conflict and misunderstanding to have when people are colonizing areas. If not with religion, then with philosophical mindsets and other deep rooted culturally based mindsets. Misunderstandings caused by these things happen a lot.

I agree with all that you say, Karin.