Talk:C. J. Cherryh

message: I first read this article in the French version, and I'm pleased to see both articles include the mention of the "internse third person" technique.  This clarified for me something that had intangibly intrigued me for a long time about Cherryh's style, and it is much appreciated.  Thank you to the authors of the articles! —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.90.17.134 (talk • contribs) 13:35, 2 July 2007 UTC
I found a link off of wikipedia on her Writing Style. TimSSG (talk) 09:36, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Thanks for the citation – I've added it to the "Writing style" section. --Bruce1eetalk 10:05, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
replies: text: Looking at that EncycloCentral link again, I see that it appears to have been sourced from C. J. Cherryh! Which means it can't be used as a citation in this article. Although at the bottom of the EncycloCentral page it states that it "provides original, informative & authoritative reviews & articles." What do you make of that? --Bruce1eetalk 13:17, 20 February 2008 (UTC)
thread_title: Writing Style

message: There seems to me to be an over-emphasis on gender issues, relative to the other major themes which Cherryh also deals with. On due consideration, I think that this mostly is due to the citing of many specific examples of damage suffered by male characters, which does not, in my opinion, contribute substantially to the value of the article.
This was the cut section:
"An underlying theme of her work is an exploration of gender roles. Her characters reveal both strengths and weaknesses regardless of their gender, although her female protagonists are portrayed as especially capable and determined.
In addition, many of her male characters are mentally damaged in some manner, having been through a physical, emotional, or mental trauma, generally as a result of intentional abuse: Josh Talley in Downbelow Station was mind-wiped and sexually abused; Sandor in Merchanter's Luck had his entire family killed and often pushes the limits of exhaustion and the use of tranks for jumps; Ramey (also known as NG, or No Good) in Rimrunners was sent through jump without his tranks, as was Tully in the Chanur series and Sten Duncan in the Faded Sun Trilogy. Paul Dekker, the protagonist in Heavy Time went crazy after witnessing the murder of his close female friend, and is further abused in the sequel Hellburner. Several characters, including the main character, Thomas, in Tripoint have been psychologically and physically abused. Justin in Cyteen was repeatedly drugged and physically as well as psychologically violated."
I would suggest that in Downbelow Station, Elene Quen had suffered a similar degree of trauma, if not in the same way as Talley, and that Signy Mallory was, in yet other ways, as war-damaged as Talley. In fact, as I recall, the confrontations between Talley and Mallory seemed to me to indicate a degree of recognition of mutual damage. I'll give you Sandor. In Rimrunners, Bet Yeager had also suffered traumatically, if with a different response. In the Chanur series, Hilfy undergoes torture at the hands of the kif right along with Tully. I'll grant you Dekker, but what about Thomas' mother in Tripoint? (I forget her name) She was nuts, Thomas was sane. And in Cyteen, Justin is only a counterpoint to the wholesale manipulation that Ariane Emory II undergoes.
We could argue this back and forth, as I see has been done with the 'brilliant' vs 'difficult' interpretations of Cherryh's writing style, but I am not disagreeing that Cherryh does tend to portray her female protagonists as strong and her male ones as vulnerable. I am just saying that it is not as prominent, or dominating, a feature of her work as it appears to be from the section as it was.
Therefore, I have reduced the cut part of the section to this:
"One underlying theme of her work is an exploration of gender roles. Her characters reveal both strengths and weaknesses regardless of their gender, although her female protagonists are portrayed as especially capable and determined, and many of her male characters are portrayed as damaged, abused or otherwise vulnerable."
I actually think this is still overstating the case somewhat, but acceptable.
David FLXD (talk) 14:35, 19 June 2012 (UTC)
thread_title:  Major Themes reviewed 

message: I am rather surprised to discover that one of the most important facts about this author is the pronunciation of the middle name that she doesn't use when writing SF. Or at least I can only assume it is important as it is in the lede.Greglocock (talk) 04:43, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
replies: text: I agree, there's no need to include the pronunciation of her middle name. I've removed it. —Bruce1eetalk 05:14, 9 January 2014 (UTC)
thread_title:  Lede - pronunciation of her middle name 

message: Her initials, C.J., were used to disguise the fact that she was female at a time when almost all science fiction authors were male.
This conflates two distinct questions. She did choose to be published under her initials. The rationale is unclear; I am not persuaded by an offline citation. It might be because Cherryh or Wollheim felt that "almost all science fiction writers were male." 
But that is not a true belief. At the time of her first sale, there were many prominent women sf writers who wrote under female first names. A few examples: Marion Zimmer Bradley was a best-selling author for Wollheim at the time. When Cherryh got her first Hugo Best Novel nomination in 1979, she was competing with Vonda McIntyre (winner) and Anne McCaffrey. The year she signed, Kate Wilhelm won. There's a similar presence in the Nebula Awards, e.g., 1976 shows Tanith, Vonda, Joanna, Marion, and Katherine.
Enoent (talk) 23:04, 3 November 2017 (UTC)
replies: text: I've added a Google Book link to pages 19–20 of that offline source (The Cherryh Odyssey); you should see them in a Google preview. I believe that statement is supported by those pages in the source. —Bruce1eetalk 08:29, 4 November 2017 (UTC)
thread_title:  Decision to publish as C.J. 

message: the article says "Using carbon paper to make at least one copy of a manuscript was standard practice until the advent of the personal computer.)"
Not quite true, I think.  I don't have information on exactly what writers did in the 60's and early 70's, but Xerox machines came out, I'd say, AT LEAST 10 years before personal computers.  Xerox came out with its first copier in 1963, according to Wikipedia, and the Altair 8800 in 1974. Before that there were kits one could buy, but you had to be a computer geek, not just a writer looking for a tool, and mass storage was on cassette tapes. Commodore and Apple started shipping around 1977.  Also, to write on a computer you had to own one, and they were neither cheap nor very user friendly.  You could go to a Staples store, whatever the equivalent was then, and make copies for $.05 a page.  So I think there was a period of 10-15 years where there was a better alternative to carbon paper, but most people, even professional writers, didn't have computers yet, from about 1965 to the late 70's.
So I'd suggest changing it to "until the advent of copying machines and personal computers".2600:6C50:800:2787:3942:BE9B:9D88:742C (talk) 17:13, 8 January 2024 (UTC)
thread_title:  Not quite true?