I really need...
Humans/Elderlings Future Relationship. SPOILER - Rain Wilds
|
11-07-2013, 11:47,
Messaggio: #1
|
|||
|
|||
I really need...
An explanation of future human/Elderlings relationship in light of the Gause's Law.
I think my forray into the Robin Hobb's newsletter will start with precisely that EDIT: To explain myself better (I am really bad at it <.<''' ) I am curious about how a biological principle of competing for the same resources will be played out in a Elderlings/Human situation. Competition for resources between different intelligent races is nothing new in fantasy: elves and man fought for it in Middle Earth, and so did drow and dwarves in Forgotten Realms, or, well, pretty much everywhere you have two different races in one setting. BUT in RoE it is different: it is not so much as the competition itself, but the fact that it is NEW. Humans in RoE aren't used at sharing what they perceives as theirs. When two species with exactly the same needs, resources-wise, come together in nature, the usual results are: 1. One of the two got extinct (happens all the time). 2. One of the two retreats and learn to do with different resources, even slightly different (we can see it in the African savana: the various kind of erbivoures and carnivores don't actually compete, because they eat separate plants/animals. Giraffe and zebras don't compete, obviously, but neither do zebras or gnu, since they eat slightly different grasses. Cheetah don't compete with lions, because lions can't catch the fast gazzellas, and cheetah can't tackle down the big gnus or zebras. And so on.) 3. One of the two goes away. I don't know what kind of organization the ancient Elderlings had with humans, but my guess is some sort of 3. Most humans in the World had nothing whatsoever to do with Elderlings, and the one who did provided them with the resources they needed, acting more or less like medieval-subjects toward the Elderling "Lords". But the resources probably belonged to the Elderlings. I am curious about what kind of relationship is going to happen now, even because Kelsingra has on one side Bingtown and on the other the Soon-To-Be-Seven Duchies... This is a very rare quandary, one that you usually don't see in Fantasy. And I am curious about how it will be declinated... Counting that it WILL have to be declinated in some way, since fantasy has to make sense ò.ò (PS: Fool actually your example about squirrels is... Well. Gray squirrels are destroying red squirrels in the Wild which is an example of what I am saying up here) I've never seen the Icarus story as a lesson about the limitations of humans.
I see it as a lesson about the limitations of wax. “What else should you be? Human beings didn't evolve brains in order to lie around on lakes. Killing's the first thing we learned. And a good thing we did, or we'd be dead, and the tigers would own the earth.” ― Orson Scott Card, Ender's Game |
|||
11-07-2013, 15:13,
Messaggio: #2
|
|||
|
|||
RE: I really need...
What resources are they directly competing for?
|
|||
11-07-2013, 15:32,
Messaggio: #3
|
|||
|
|||
RE: I really need...
(11-07-2013, 15:13)Garetha Ha scritto: What resources are they directly competing for? With Dragons? Nothing or very little (some meat... but little). With Elderlings? Everything ò.ò Elderlings have exactly the same niche of humans if you think of it. They eat what we eat. They live how we live even if for longer... Ona a more economical and less biological view, I am very afraid that Bingtown will be reduced to the "China/Africa" to the "US/Europe" Kelsingra. (Bingtown will give low-quality and low-value products and Kelsingra will produce the high-quality, high-value products...) I've never seen the Icarus story as a lesson about the limitations of humans.
I see it as a lesson about the limitations of wax. “What else should you be? Human beings didn't evolve brains in order to lie around on lakes. Killing's the first thing we learned. And a good thing we did, or we'd be dead, and the tigers would own the earth.” ― Orson Scott Card, Ender's Game |
|||
11-07-2013, 15:42,
Messaggio: #4
|
|||
|
|||
RE: I really need...
Hmmm... this whole thread may need a spoiler warning. XD; But anyway. A) You and I still disagree about whether Elderlings qualify as a different species; B)
Rain Wilds Chronicles [leggi] |
|||
11-07-2013, 17:07,
Messaggio: #5
|
|||
|
|||
RE: I really need...
(11-07-2013, 15:42)Garetha Ha scritto: Hmmm... this whole thread may need a spoiler warning. Spoiler warning added. Thanks for caring! (11-07-2013, 15:42)Garetha Ha scritto: I'm not sure the law applies to intelligent beings that have the option to share or compromise rather than directly compete. I totally agree, especially if we consider how much the manners of new Elderlings seem different from the old ones. Apart from this, we could look at every page through the microscope but RotE is still a fantasy series in a fictional universe, so it has not to be scientifically true, but just plausible (imho it is splendidly convincing). All the elements that differ from the real world are uncertainties which can lead to plenty of possibilities. We can only wait to read what happens next... ;-) Occhi-di-notte Ha scritto: |
|||
11-07-2013, 17:47,
Messaggio: #6
|
|||
|
|||
RE: I really need...
No, Fool, sorry but not buying it.
I don't think that the "it is fantasy" card means that the authors can go out of logic or sense for free. Say you want to make a World without gravity? Fair enough, fun idea! But you have to be consistent and make sense, that is the first rule of fantasy. How does water behaves in yuor gravity-less world? Are oceans uge floating bubbles? How people acts in such a world? How do they move? Through magic? How precisely? Same with RoE. If you want to tell me basic biological principles don't apply, you have to explain what takes their place. A world without Gause's Law is a World in which there is not malthusian fight over resources. In short it is either a World in which resources are unlimited or a World in which every pair of being can only reproduce to replacment (every pair has only 2 offsprings coming to adulthood). RoE is not a World at unlimited resources nor one in which every pair reproduce only to replacment. So telling me that Guase's law doesn't apply is like telling me that 2+2=5. Nope. 2+2=4. And tell "magic!" is not enough at least for me. Magic, how precisely? Pratchett is a master in this. He makes a World -the Discworld- in which the laws are completely different from ours <b> and everything makes sense</b>. It is possible, but it requires more than "ehy it is fantasy, so it doesn't have to make sense!" <.< So humans and Elderlings are going to compete for resources. There is no much to quibble when both species needs the same things to survive. If there is 10 and there is 1 species to get it, the species get the whole 10. If there are 2 species... it can go everywhere from one species get 10 (and the other 0) to 5/5 (which is not to say this is the more moral results. It is so only if both species have the same numbers). But however you want to see it, it means LESS resources for humans. And I'll accept that Elderlings are humans when the Dragons will accept the Others are Dragons Stand to reason. Soon to be seen on Robin Hobb's Newsletter (as soon as I am done with this mad week @.@) I am preparing my aspestos suit I've never seen the Icarus story as a lesson about the limitations of humans.
I see it as a lesson about the limitations of wax. “What else should you be? Human beings didn't evolve brains in order to lie around on lakes. Killing's the first thing we learned. And a good thing we did, or we'd be dead, and the tigers would own the earth.” ― Orson Scott Card, Ender's Game |
|||
11-07-2013, 18:17,
Messaggio: #7
|
|||
|
|||
RE: I really need...
(11-07-2013, 17:47)Tiz Ha scritto: I don't think that the "it is fantasy" card means that the authors can go out of logic or sense for free. I agree. However, I think RH HAS explained it sufficiently. Gause's law depends on a simplified scenario without a lot of extraneous factors, and most importantly, it depends on averages. One species triumphs over another eventually if, on average, it maintains an advantage over the other species. In individual cases, one on one, a member of the weaker species may still overcome a member of the stronger one; some random environmental factor may shift the odds; traits that were negligible before may develop to become beneficial. In short, it's not an immediate and inevitable process for one species to wipe out another, even where Gause's Law applies. On average, it's probable, but there are exceptions and special cases. Now, RoE is a world BUILT upon exceptions and special cases, specifically because one of its major magics is the White Prophet/Catalyst pair. Their entire function is to search out unlikely futures which they consider beneficial and bring them into being. We can start rehashing whether Beloved's judgement of a 'good' future is right or not, but regardless of your opinion on that matter, you have to agree that they turn the Law of Averages on its ear. The world at the time of the RWC is already an extremely unlikely one due to Fitz and Beloved's involvement. And since I doubt Beloved and Fitz, or any other WP/C team in the near future, is likely to call the end of humanity a good thing, I think we'll find that the situation will stabilize. Citazione:So humans and Elderlings are going to compete for resources. There is no much to quibble when both species needs the same things to survive. If there is 10 and there is 1 species to get it, the species get the whole 10. If there are 2 species... it can go everywhere from one species get 10 (and the other 0) to 5/5 (which is not to say this is the more moral results. It is so only if both species have the same numbers). But however you want to see it, it means LESS resources for humans. Unless humans aren't using all the resources to start with. The RoE is a BIG world with a lot of unoccupied territory. Citazione:And I'll accept that Elderlings are humans when the Dragons will accept the Others are Dragons Stand to reason. I'm not as well versed in logical fallacies as you are, but there has to be at least ONE addressing the idea that your use or misuse of logic has to match your opponent's. |
|||
11-07-2013, 18:22,
Messaggio: #8
|
|||
|
|||
RE: I really need...
I didn't say that a fictional world can be out of logic. I said that a fictional world — like the RotE universe — should be plausibile, which doesn't mean senseless. :-)
You are sure that humans and Elderlings will end to compete; I am not. The Gause's Law can be easily applied to different species of squirrels competing for nuts, in our world and in RotE. But speaking of humans and Elderlings, there's a ethical variable: they could choose to cooperate and grow together rather than battle for resources. Occhi-di-notte Ha scritto: |
|||
13-07-2013, 18:01,
Messaggio: #9
|
|||
|
|||
RE: I really need...
(11-07-2013, 18:22)The Fool Ha scritto: I didn't say that a fictional world can be out of logic. I said that a fictional world — like the RotE universe — should be plausibile, which doesn't mean senseless. :-) They could. So could have done Palestinian and Israelian, or Native American and the Pioneer. But so has not happen, and still doesn't. Once, the Six Duchies were Elderlings' ground. Wouldn't the future Elderlings want back what they may consider theirs? I've never seen the Icarus story as a lesson about the limitations of humans.
I see it as a lesson about the limitations of wax. “What else should you be? Human beings didn't evolve brains in order to lie around on lakes. Killing's the first thing we learned. And a good thing we did, or we'd be dead, and the tigers would own the earth.” ― Orson Scott Card, Ender's Game |
|||
« Precedente | Successivo »
|
Utente(i) che stanno guardando questa discussione: 1 Ospite(i)