Talk:The Weapon Shops of Isher

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

	Literature Portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Novels, an attempt to build a comprehensive and detailed guide to narrative novels, novellas, novelettes and short stories on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, you can edit one of the articles mentioned below, or visit the project page, where you can join the project and contribute to the general Project discussion to talk over new ideas and suggestions.
Stub	This article has been rated as Stub-Class.
Mid	This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the importance scale.
	This article is supported by the Science fiction task force. (with unknown importance)
Assessment comments This article has been rated for quality and/or importance but has no comments yet. If appropriate, please review the article and then leave comments here to identify the strengths and weaknesses of the article and what work it will need.

[edit] SF

...[in relation to other libertarian-oriented SF, even beyond its literary merits....]

What may this mean, and am I alone in being offended by it??? --Dumarest 22:15, 11 March 2006 (UTC)

I hope you're alone. When I discovered this book in 1972 the only place I heard libertarianism being discussed was among science fiction fans and I always associated this book with them. A lot of science fiction is libertarian-oriented (can you say Robert A. Heinlein?). I don't know if Van Vogt explicitly intended this because I was so repulsed by his involvement in Scientology so I was always afraid to ask someone who might know, but the book has been associated with some libertarian thinkers for a very very long time. Jplatt39 14:45, 12 March 2006 (UTC)

That's a bit unfair. While van Vogt thought Dianetics was worthwhile as a technique and was involved with its secular promotion, he disapproved of Scientology strongly because of its fraudulently religious nature and never took any part in it. I get the impression that he was wrong about Dianetics but acted honourably and in good faith, something that could not truthfully be said about Hubbard.

As for Weapon Shops, I find it difficult to see why people whould think of it as "libertarian-oriented". It describes a social system consisting of a permanent monarchy/dictatorship existing in perpetual conflict/balance with an oligarchic opposition. Both sides are far from libertarian. In fact we discover as the book progresses that they are both the creation of one man, an immortal super-scientist who intervenes from time to time to ensure that neither side gains the upper hand. The slogan "The right to buy weapons is the right to be free" is the nearest thing to a libertarian idea in it. But if people think that the book is libertarian on that basis, they must be confusing the NRA with the Libertarian Party, an easy mistake to make given the overlap in membership but a mistake nonetheless. -- Derek Ross | Talk 03:08, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

If you want a van Vogt book that describes a superior libertarian/anarchist society, you'd be better advised to read The World of Null-A which describes such a society on Venus. However van Vogt makes it clear in that book that the Venusians owe their free society not to "the right to bear arms" but rather to the superior education and rationality which follows from their use of General Semantics. -- Derek Ross | Talk 04:30, 4 October 2006 (UTC)

I don't believe that 131.111.200.200's edits of the plot summary were bad. I do think it still needs work (It's about the sequel and doesn't cover the short stories which made up the original Weapons Shop). If 131.111.200.200 is reading this, Van Vogt was a pulp writer who was consciously writing adventure stories (I believe he tried to include a major surprise every 800 words). In theory one can not only say "It is also conceivable that he has not thought through the implications of his society in full detail" but one can say it is probable as he concentrated on storytelling almost to the exclusion of everything else in most of his work. Nevertheless that statement is an opinion covered by Wikipedia's No Point of View and No Original Research. Jplatt39 12:14, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

You're right. Each of the short stories explored another aspect of Isher society but there's no way that van Vogt thought through anything "in full detail" -- whatever that might mean. He thought through the implications in just (about) enough detail to hold the plot together (on a good day anyway). Van Vogt's strength was as an innovator rather than an developer. His books are memorable for the cornucopia of new ideas within them, not for the exhaustive (or even logical) analysis of those ideas. -- Derek Ross | Talk 14:58, 19 October 2007 (UTC)

I'll say. Zaslav 06:54, 15 November 2007 (UTC)