While I understand the widespread frustration about Tate being more or less a one-note villain, I don't know that I see a way around it.
The thing is this: it's certainly true that not all conservative/fundamentalist Christians are bigoted idiots. (Over the years, I've known a number of very intelligent, thoughtful folk of this description -- a couple of whom were avid players of Dungeons & Dragons, a fact which never ceased to boggle my mind.
But given the particular sort of conservative/fundie Christian who is in fact convinced of his own righteousness and determined to enact it (and I've run into a few of these, too), the stereotype is all too accurate. Thus, Tate's characterization is entirely realistic -- and making him a more nuanced character would be, arguably, to make him less true-to-life. Indeed, I found the contrast between Ryman's and Tate's religious perspectives very much in line with the real-life contrast I've observed and described above.
The problem here is that saying someone is a fundamentalist conservative does not explain why they would want to commit mass murder. And yet Grant does not provide any additional motivation in the story. Buffy is excused because she didn't know it would lead to death, but she still betrays her friends' trust and throws her lot in with a seemingly illegal plot to bring down a presidential candidate and the only motivation provided is religion. I am find with having religious people be the bad guys, but the bad things they do still need a logical explanation. I found this element of the book very off putting, and although I thought it was a fun, compelling read, but the religion thing is one reason I won't be picking up the next book.
Based on your review, I decided to read the book. Even though I knew Georgia was going to die, I thought it was well written and compelling. I did feel rather offended by the religion thing. I couldn't figure out WHY Tate and Buffy were doing the things they were doing, and so I couldn't get around believing that the author was telling me that religious people are bad people and do bad things for totally bad and illogical reasons. It was really pretty unsatisfying. I thought that Buffy's notes would contain an explanation of the conspiracy, with whys and wherefores. I'm still boggled. How does killing a bunch of people via zombie virus accomplish any goal of any advantage to Tate? And especially once he was on the ticket as VP, what possible motivation could have for wanting to kill anyone in the campaign
( ... )
The baristas stare at him in astonishment, and then apparently decide not to argue with him. Argue with him about what? About buying coffee?
About ordering a large coffee instead of whatever made up word Starbucks uses instead of "large". At least that was my take on it. Starbucks baristas are a bit notorious for being jerks to people who don't use the correct corporate terminology.
Eh. I've never had any trouble at Starbucks using "small" or whatever. I thought maybe they were supposed to be astonished that he didn't want an espresso drink? I really don't know.
Comments 35
The thing is this: it's certainly true that not all conservative/fundamentalist Christians are bigoted idiots. (Over the years, I've known a number of very intelligent, thoughtful folk of this description -- a couple of whom were avid players of Dungeons & Dragons, a fact which never ceased to boggle my mind.
But given the particular sort of conservative/fundie Christian who is in fact convinced of his own righteousness and determined to enact it (and I've run into a few of these, too), the stereotype is all too accurate. Thus, Tate's characterization is entirely realistic -- and making him a more nuanced character would be, arguably, to make him less true-to-life. Indeed, I found the contrast between Ryman's and Tate's religious perspectives very much in line with the real-life contrast I've observed and described above.
Reply
Reply
I'm torn between calling you a bastard, and a magnificent bastard.
With all due respect. :)
I reviewed Feed for SF Site a while back, but in general, I really liked it.
Reply
Do you happen to have a link to your review of Feed?
Reply
Reply
Reply
Reply
About ordering a large coffee instead of whatever made up word Starbucks uses instead of "large". At least that was my take on it. Starbucks baristas are a bit notorious for being jerks to people who don't use the correct corporate terminology.
Reply
Reply
Leave a comment