Sunday, May 2, 2010

Substantive: Look to Windward

Okay, let's get straight to the point about Look to Windward right now. It's not really about post-scarcity technology or aliens from another world getting revenge. It's about Americas activity abroad functioning as a "world police" entity. All of this is too obvious in the book - Culture's decadence rings of America, from the extreme sports to the fashion flings which seem pass as soon as they arrive. Chel, on the other hand, seems to be the "other" to America. Seeing as though the novel was written for Gulf War veterans, the Chel can't NOT be designed around a Middle Eastern nation or people. In the end, it appears to be a tale of a terrorist attack against America (or the West in general, seeing as though Banks is Scottish).

This isn't to say that Look to Windward isn't worthy of an in-depth analysis - it simply just has a generally more obvious analogy to the real world. We've gone over in class what the moral implications of interference has on other people. Culture, on the whole, seems to have the opposite policy of the prime directive - interference whenever possible. And who could blame those humans? We saw how those on Chel have a caste system so severe a member of a higher caste can throw a lesser person of society off a cliff and not suffer the consequences! That seems like a pretty clear-cut travesty to me. But we face the same problems here on Earth! Should the US interfere in countries that we feel will benefit from our own culture?

The message of Look to Windward is pretty clear cut in that regard, too. Culture started the war with Chel, and the Caste War, because they helped and armed the lower castes. It might of been benevolent to Culture, but it meant the deaths of many. Banks shows that this kind of help isn't only deadly, but it forms groups that attempt to retaliate against you! Quilan wouldn't have a motive to destroy Masaq if his mate hadn't been lost in the war. The war created the kind of person Quilan had to be in order to kill himself in that way. And that is freakishly like the world we live in, where the United States, functioning almost just like Culture, is creating wars and interfering, only to create people who want to kill US citizens from an act we see as benevolence. The message is obvious: interference doesn't always work.

2 comments:

  1. I found your post very insightful concerning the real world analogy of the novel. Indeed, Culture seems to resemble the US with its' affluence, conspicious consumption and citizens enagaging in a number of things to preoccupy themselves from Twilight novel to the Jay-Z concerts Amanda mentioned. The US often also tries to take on the role of police man, often resulting in more conflict than any US intervention could have solved. Our attempts to impede the spread of communism, for example, in South America especially has lead to civil wars and the installation of authoritarian regimes. Perhaps this novel is indeed a warning of the consequences of such actions in areas such as the Middle East, where challenging religious fanaticism is like poking the proverbial hornets' nest.

    ReplyDelete
  2. Andrew,

    I don't know if I believe that this book has the message that we shouldn't have interventionist policy. Yes, the book reveals that certain action can create enemies. But there are too many events which dilute this message. The biggest is that we find out it probably was CULTURE, or members of culture, that created this plot(because they wanted Culture to...intervene more...). Also, Culture is seen as having all the sources and answers, as one of the lead men of the plot, the spirit/memory assisting the Major, was actually a Culture spy! Not only was the plot created by Culture, but it was defeated because of how prepared Culture was.

    Enemies are made with any kind of action, statement, or policy position. The question America needs to ask itself is if the policy that creates enemies is worth the increase of threat. That is the question Culture should have asked itself when it intervened with the Chel. But, maybe they did? Maybe the Civil War was the success...

    ReplyDelete