Transcribe
Translate
Venus, v. 1, issue 1, June 1944
Page 5
More information
digital collection
archival collection guide
transcription tips
-5- but their minds, after a few years, lose that intangible something that makes them stand out form the mob. and they sink into oblivion, and quite often end up in an institute for the mentally unbalanced. The author of Odd John deals in generalities. I will admit that if he had met a future man, he would be incapable of understanding the alien concept of such a being, but under actual circumstances, he could have at least set down some of the alien's beliefs and thoughts. Mr. Stapledon plays around with words beautifully, but, and perhaps this is because of his English reserve, I was never exactly sure whether the boy was going to turn out to be erotic, bisexual, or presumably normal. It may be that is the author's concept of our future civilization, but I am sure that the greater intelligence of the future will not be spent in promiscous finding out about sex. The moral aspect of John and his followers is a question that could arouse a lot of comment. It seemed to him that morals were merely 'that which is good for me and my own growing'. Just what are morals, not as man's rigid conventions set them forth, but as the actual lessons nature teaches us? As I once heard said, "The human body is, in itself, the best of moralists. Too much liquor, or promiscous sex, or any thing that is wrong for the body, will show in the body's aspect and well-being, and therefore, the body, in itself, lays down cur moral standards." The author was shocked, although claiming no condemnation, at John's callous slaying of humans. John, in his mind, had no more feeling about killing a human than we have at killing birds, insects or animals. He was more deeply moved at killing a deer than at killing a policeman. Were not John and the deer one? Both were not tarnished by man-made civilization or restraint. John was surrounding himself with nature, and both John and the deer carried that same feeling of wonder at man's seeming disinterest in nature. Unfortunately, the book was not of John, but about John. Tragically, the author was not able to define the truths he could only give a vague, unclear image of, and one blunders through a veil of suggestion and intimation of what might be, feeling rather frustrated that he is not able to see more clearly. That, plus the general description of the Homo Superiors, I found distressing, and my revulsion at their physical appearance is purely the mind of Homo Sapiien revolting against the possibility of an appearance that does not flatter the ego. One more point I would like to understand. We, as a whole, look up to and admire those who have a talent or superior mind that sets them apart form the mine-run of humanity. Only rarely does someone become mentally unbalanced and let their envy drive them to violence. Is it then, necessary to suppose that humanity, on the whole, would naturally want to destroy Homo Superior? humanity, as it now stands, is a herd of sheep that will follow and leader. Is it not natural to suppose that Homo Superior would, with his greater intelligence, realize that, and make himself beloved and trusted of man and they, his willing slaves for his greater good, rather than his enemies? So let us consider Odd John for the most part, fiction, for his intelligence was not greater that Homo Sapiens, since he could not percieve that simple fact. Odd John was no more or less than the book title says, "Odd John".
Saving...
prev
next
-5- but their minds, after a few years, lose that intangible something that makes them stand out form the mob. and they sink into oblivion, and quite often end up in an institute for the mentally unbalanced. The author of Odd John deals in generalities. I will admit that if he had met a future man, he would be incapable of understanding the alien concept of such a being, but under actual circumstances, he could have at least set down some of the alien's beliefs and thoughts. Mr. Stapledon plays around with words beautifully, but, and perhaps this is because of his English reserve, I was never exactly sure whether the boy was going to turn out to be erotic, bisexual, or presumably normal. It may be that is the author's concept of our future civilization, but I am sure that the greater intelligence of the future will not be spent in promiscous finding out about sex. The moral aspect of John and his followers is a question that could arouse a lot of comment. It seemed to him that morals were merely 'that which is good for me and my own growing'. Just what are morals, not as man's rigid conventions set them forth, but as the actual lessons nature teaches us? As I once heard said, "The human body is, in itself, the best of moralists. Too much liquor, or promiscous sex, or any thing that is wrong for the body, will show in the body's aspect and well-being, and therefore, the body, in itself, lays down cur moral standards." The author was shocked, although claiming no condemnation, at John's callous slaying of humans. John, in his mind, had no more feeling about killing a human than we have at killing birds, insects or animals. He was more deeply moved at killing a deer than at killing a policeman. Were not John and the deer one? Both were not tarnished by man-made civilization or restraint. John was surrounding himself with nature, and both John and the deer carried that same feeling of wonder at man's seeming disinterest in nature. Unfortunately, the book was not of John, but about John. Tragically, the author was not able to define the truths he could only give a vague, unclear image of, and one blunders through a veil of suggestion and intimation of what might be, feeling rather frustrated that he is not able to see more clearly. That, plus the general description of the Homo Superiors, I found distressing, and my revulsion at their physical appearance is purely the mind of Homo Sapiien revolting against the possibility of an appearance that does not flatter the ego. One more point I would like to understand. We, as a whole, look up to and admire those who have a talent or superior mind that sets them apart form the mine-run of humanity. Only rarely does someone become mentally unbalanced and let their envy drive them to violence. Is it then, necessary to suppose that humanity, on the whole, would naturally want to destroy Homo Superior? humanity, as it now stands, is a herd of sheep that will follow and leader. Is it not natural to suppose that Homo Superior would, with his greater intelligence, realize that, and make himself beloved and trusted of man and they, his willing slaves for his greater good, rather than his enemies? So let us consider Odd John for the most part, fiction, for his intelligence was not greater that Homo Sapiens, since he could not percieve that simple fact. Odd John was no more or less than the book title says, "Odd John".
Hevelin Fanzines
sidebar
