Kevin's Watch

As we know, the Preempt Act was founded on two accusations, (1) that Com-Mine Security was involved in sabotaging Starmaster, and (2) that Com-Mine Security was involved in conspiring with an illegal. It's the second I want to focus on, because Donaldson doesn't handle it consistently.

In Forbidden Knowledge, Donaldson implies that the Preempt Act was passed because Com-Mine Security had conspired with Nick to frame Angus. See the second Angus chapter, where Min says:

"The Preempt Act. How do you suppose we got that passed?... That was the lever we needed -- a traitor in Com-Mine Security, somebody who was willing to help a pirate like Captain Succorso steal station supplies. Morn Hyland's accusation that Starmaster was sabotaged helped, but we needed more."

Or even clearer, in the Ancillary Documentation chapter on "The Preempt Act":

"Several factors conspired to make the Preempt Act seem necessary... The Thermopyle case on Com-Mine Station, in particular... There Security had apparently conspired with one suspected illegal to trap another..."

In other words, in Forbidden Knowledge, the implication is that the Preempt Act was founded on the accusation that Com-Mine was in collusion with Nick -- in other words, that Angus was framed. By the time of Chaos and Order, however, that's no longer true. Now we are told the Preempt Act was founded on the accusation that Com-Mine was in collusion with Angus -- and that Morn is thus needed to return to Earth and testify that Angus was framed by Com-Mine and Nick. See the first Hashi chapter:

"A living Morn Hyland represented a palpable threat to [Holt Fasner]... She could testify that Com-Mine bore no fault for Starmaster's death. And she could testify that Angus was guiltless of the crime for which he'd been arrested and convicted... The still-recent passage of the Preempt Act had been founded squarely on those two accusations: that Com-Mine Security had performed or permitted sabotage against Starmaster; and that Security had conspired with Captain Thermopyle to steal station supplies."

Evidently in the earlier books Donaldson hadn't realized how much he was going to need Morn Hyland to have a "legitimate" reason for being abducted by Nick. After all, what purpose did Warden Dios have in allowing that to happen? Obviously not the stated reason (so that Nick could have insurance in case he needed to sell something like a cop's id tag, or to use for sex)... but then what? Dios allowed Morn to be taken so that Holt Fasner wouldn't be able to suppress her. But what needs to be suppressed? The fact that Angus was innocent of the crime he'd been accused of, in other words, the fact that Milos and Nick framed him. But in Forbidden Knowledge, that's exactly why the Preempt Act passed -- on the accusation that Security conspired with one illegal to trap another! Which makes Morn's testimony rather unnecessary.

So Donaldson changed the Preempt Act's premise by the fourth book. The Preempt Act passed on the assumption that Security conspired with Angus - not with Nick to frame Angus.

Does this sound right to everyone?

Sounds right to me. Consider: The points with Nick working with Com-Mine Security in order to trap Angus may have raised some eyebrows, but I do not think that this would have been enough to garner instant support for the Preempt Act. They needed something else, and the whole Angus affair provided them with that something else. Not only was Com-Mine working with an illegal to catch an illegal (something that may be approved of) but the whole situation was so obscure, it could be that the same security or part of it could also have helped Angus. This gave the impression that station security was corrupt and unreliable, which was the whole reasoning to pass the Preempt Act. Now, Morn can show up, and even though she may not be able to address the first couple of points, her testimony would cast doubt on the accusation that Com-Mine station security was completly corrupt and unreliable.

Presumably this is Donaldson's answer to your query on the GI?

It seems clear that you've read the GAP books far more recently than I have. <sigh> I haven't looked at them since, say, '97. So I'm going to have to rely on my increasingly-unreliable memory here.

My first reaction is that the "inconsistency" you describe is contextual: in different situations, different people emphasize different aspects of the same action/event/development. As the story goes along, Nick's role becomes decreasingly important (in context), while the role of Angus looms larger. At the same time, Min Donner's perception of events (having some personal stake in them) is naturally different than more public perceptions.

That may sound like rationalization. Perhaps it is. But if you were the GCES, which argument would carry more weight with you? a) Com-Mine Security conspired with one illegal to trap another, so at least we caught one of them, hooray. Or b) Com-Mine Security conspired with an illegal to steal station supplies, thus betraying the station and Security's own mandate, those bastards. Interpretation modulates as context modulates.

Meanwhile your query, "I'm wondering if in the earlier books you hadn't realized how much you were going to need Morn Hyland to have a "legitimate" reason for being abducted by Nick," prompts me to argue that Morn at every point in the story ALWAYS had a "legitimate" reason for being abducted by/going with Nick. It's legitimate on every level of the plot, from Morn's most personal necessities to Dios' most elaborate machinations. If from time to time the text emphasizes different aspects of the general situation, that doesn't change the fact that my characters have legitimate reasons for what they do when they do it.

I don't personally see how he can pass it off as contextual. Whilst you can argue that Min's viewpoint was wrong/misleading and (just possibly) the Ancillary Documentation is a little too vague, there appears to be a logical inconsistency surely in Angus being reqqued under the Preempt Act on the basis that he had conspired to steal station supplies with the complicity of ComMine Security (if the reason for the Preempt Act is that ComMine security conspired to frame Angus falsely for stealing station supplies with the help of another illegal).

(I have this vague recollection that Angus was originally held for stealing supplies from the distressed supply ship (that never existed)? Only later when that ship arrived safe and sound did it come to light that there had been no emergency or missing ship and the supplies had actually come from ComMine itself? Though that wouldn't alter the inconsistency.)

Hashi Lebwohl wrote:The resolution to this apparent discrepancy is easily attained: the truth of the Preempt Act, whether you are told that is was because Com-Mine Security was actually involved in collusion to commit crimes or merely allowed one illegal to entrap another (dereliction of duty), is irrelevant. Only the perception of truth matters. The GCSE votes needed to believe that Com-Mine Security could not be trusted and, by logical extension, that no other security could be trusted thus setting up the scenario where the only place they could turn would be the UMCP. Once the Act passed, Holt needed Morn silenced so that her potential testimony couldn't weaken the Act. He most likely presumed that Nick would just kill her if she crossed him or just sell her to the Amnion if he needed money or supplies; either way, once she left with Nick she wasn't a problem any more.

Agreed. Perception of truth was a major theme at some points of the Gap - just as it was with the movie The Big Lebowski.

Hashi Lebwohl wrote:The resolution to this apparent discrepancy is easily attained: the truth of the Preempt Act, whether you are told that is was because Com-Mine Security was actually involved in collusion to commit crimes or merely allowed one illegal to entrap another (dereliction of duty), is irrelevant. Only the perception of truth matters. The GCSE votes needed to believe that Com-Mine Security could not be trusted and, by logical extension, that no other security could be trusted thus setting up the scenario where the only place they could turn would be the UMCP. Once the Act passed, Holt needed Morn silenced so that her potential testimony couldn't weaken the Act. He most likely presumed that Nick would just kill her if she crossed him or just sell her to the Amnion if he needed money or supplies; either way, once she left with Nick she wasn't a problem any more.

Sorry, but I don't accept this. It seems more likely to be an authorial cock-up.

I quite agree that perceptions can differ and indeed this is a major theme in the book (and one worked quite brilliantly on occasions). However...

The first quote in the post above by largo is from Min Donner and the second quote is from Hashi. They would both have been involved in the plot to set up Com-Mine to get the Pre-empt Act passed - they would both have known the basis of the plan at the outset (unless they were not singing from the same song-sheet at the outset).

Barnetto wrote:

Hashi Lebwohl wrote:The resolution to this apparent discrepancy is easily attained: the truth of the Preempt Act, whether you are told that is was because Com-Mine Security was actually involved in collusion to commit crimes or merely allowed one illegal to entrap another (dereliction of duty), is irrelevant. Only the perception of truth matters. The GCSE votes needed to believe that Com-Mine Security could not be trusted and, by logical extension, that no other security could be trusted thus setting up the scenario where the only place they could turn would be the UMCP. Once the Act passed, Holt needed Morn silenced so that her potential testimony couldn't weaken the Act. He most likely presumed that Nick would just kill her if she crossed him or just sell her to the Amnion if he needed money or supplies; either way, once she left with Nick she wasn't a problem any more.

Sorry, but I don't accept this. It seems more likely to be an authorial cock-up.

I quite agree that perceptions can differ and indeed this is a major theme in the book (and one worked quite brilliantly on occasions). However...

The first quote in the post above by largo is from Min Donner and the second quote is from Hashi. They would both have been involved in the plot to set up Com-Mine to get the Pre-empt Act passed - they would both have known the basis of the plan at the outset (unless they were not singing from the same song-sheet at the outset).

It works for me, for three reasons:
It depends on whose talking and what they're like [Min is military, honest, straight forward, actions speak, cause/effect, things are TRUE. Hashi is fluid subjectivity personified, chaos/possibilities, manipulative, secretive, a deep game, mostly non-moral till quite close to the end, truth is malleable]
It depends on what they know and want [Min is intentionally kept in the dark on things by both Hashi and Warden, and it's common for the front line peeps and the intelligence peeps to want the same objective for completely different reasons...and to interpret a single thing in very different ways]
It's the way politics often works: irrelevant reasons offered, or justifications altered retroactively as if they'd always been so...for instance, the war with Iraq...and the real reason we use ethanol in our gas.]

Barnetto wrote:Sorry, but I don't accept this.

Fortunately, you don't have to.

Vraith wrote:

Barnetto wrote:

Hashi Lebwohl wrote:The resolution to this apparent discrepancy is easily attained: the truth of the Preempt Act, whether you are told that is was because Com-Mine Security was actually involved in collusion to commit crimes or merely allowed one illegal to entrap another (dereliction of duty), is irrelevant. Only the perception of truth matters. The GCSE votes needed to believe that Com-Mine Security could not be trusted and, by logical extension, that no other security could be trusted thus setting up the scenario where the only place they could turn would be the UMCP. Once the Act passed, Holt needed Morn silenced so that her potential testimony couldn't weaken the Act. He most likely presumed that Nick would just kill her if she crossed him or just sell her to the Amnion if he needed money or supplies; either way, once she left with Nick she wasn't a problem any more.

Sorry, but I don't accept this. It seems more likely to be an authorial cock-up.

I quite agree that perceptions can differ and indeed this is a major theme in the book (and one worked quite brilliantly on occasions). However...

The first quote in the post above by largo is from Min Donner and the second quote is from Hashi. They would both have been involved in the plot to set up Com-Mine to get the Pre-empt Act passed - they would both have known the basis of the plan at the outset (unless they were not singing from the same song-sheet at the outset).

It works for me, for three reasons:
It depends on whose talking and what they're like [Min is military, honest, straight forward, actions speak, cause/effect, things are TRUE. Hashi is fluid subjectivity personified, chaos/possibilities, manipulative, secretive, a deep game, mostly non-moral till quite close to the end, truth is malleable]
It depends on what they know and want [Min is intentionally kept in the dark on things by both Hashi and Warden, and it's common for the front line peeps and the intelligence peeps to want the same objective for completely different reasons...and to interpret a single thing in very different ways]
It's the way politics often works: irrelevant reasons offered, or justifications altered retroactively as if they'd always been so...for instance, the war with Iraq...and the real reason we use ethanol in our gas.]

But what about the logical inconsistency that it results in? ie Angus being reqqued under the Preempt Act on the basis that he had conspired to steal station supplies with the complicity of ComMine Security (if the reason for the Preempt Act is that ComMine security conspired to frame Angus falsely for stealing station supplies with the help of another illegal).

Perceptions can and do change over time and with different information. But reqquing Angus immediately on the basis of the opposite premise to that which led to the Pre-empt Act is surely too big a leap?

Hashi Lebwohl wrote:

Barnetto wrote:Sorry, but I don't accept this.

Fortunately, you don't have to.

Thanks for the confirmation!

It felt enough like real politics (ie, everyone has their own reasoning & interpretation) that it didn't bother me.

Rigel wrote:It felt enough like real politics (ie, everyone has their own reasoning & interpretation) that it didn't bother me.

I was so immersed in the complexities of the plot that I never even noticed it (and wouldn't have done had someone much smarter than me pointed it out here!)

It's largely just nitpicking - it certainly doesn't affect my enjoyment of such an awesome work - I would be amazed if there wasn't some element of inconsistency in there somewhere given the complexities that SRD worked into the plot...

PS The only thing that actually bothered me in terms of plot is that I just couldn't buy the idea that Earth would be so undefended as to allow one alien spaceship to represent such a threat. I know that SRD did his best to foreshadow and explain that element in the Ancillary Documentation but it just didn't seem realistic.

Barnetto wrote:

Rigel wrote:It felt enough like real politics (ie, everyone has their own reasoning & interpretation) that it didn't bother me.

I was so immersed in the complexities of the plot that I never even noticed it (and wouldn't have done had someone much smarter than me pointed it out here!)

It's largely just nitpicking - it certainly doesn't affect my enjoyment of such an awesome work - I would be amazed if there wasn't some element of inconsistency in there somewhere given the complexities that SRD worked into the plot...

PS The only thing that actually bothered me in terms of plot is that I just couldn't buy the idea that Earth would be so undefended as to allow one alien spaceship to represent such a threat. I know that SRD did his best to foreshadow and explain that element in the Ancillary Documentation but it just didn't seem realistic.

Remember the Cold War? I don't know your age so I don't know if you lived through any of it. But what would be the American response if a Soviet MiG was detected flying into American air space? How about a dozen?

TheWormoftheWorld'sEnd wrote:

Barnetto wrote:

Rigel wrote:It felt enough like real politics (ie, everyone has their own reasoning & interpretation) that it didn't bother me.

I was so immersed in the complexities of the plot that I never even noticed it (and wouldn't have done had someone much smarter than me pointed it out here!)

It's largely just nitpicking - it certainly doesn't affect my enjoyment of such an awesome work - I would be amazed if there wasn't some element of inconsistency in there somewhere given the complexities that SRD worked into the plot...

PS The only thing that actually bothered me in terms of plot is that I just couldn't buy the idea that Earth would be so undefended as to allow one alien spaceship to represent such a threat. I know that SRD did his best to foreshadow and explain that element in the Ancillary Documentation but it just didn't seem realistic.

Remember the Cold War? I don't know your age so I don't know if you lived through any of it. But what would be the American response if a Soviet MiG was detected flying into American air space? How about a dozen?

Well, as far as I recall, once the technology was (nearly) in place, ultimately the US response was the Reagan sponsored idea of the Strategic Defense Initiative (if that is the right term for the space based defensive shield).

But the Earth Authorities (and Holt Fasner of all people) have failed to make that any sort of priority here....

Barnetto wrote:

TheWormoftheWorld'sEnd wrote:

Barnetto wrote: I was so immersed in the complexities of the plot that I never even noticed it (and wouldn't have done had someone much smarter than me pointed it out here!)

It's largely just nitpicking - it certainly doesn't affect my enjoyment of such an awesome work - I would be amazed if there wasn't some element of inconsistency in there somewhere given the complexities that SRD worked into the plot...

PS The only thing that actually bothered me in terms of plot is that I just couldn't buy the idea that Earth would be so undefended as to allow one alien spaceship to represent such a threat. I know that SRD did his best to foreshadow and explain that element in the Ancillary Documentation but it just didn't seem realistic.

Remember the Cold War? I don't know your age so I don't know if you lived through any of it. But what would be the American response if a Soviet MiG was detected flying into American air space? How about a dozen?

Well, as far as I recall, once the technology was (nearly) in place, ultimately the US response was the Reagan sponsored idea of the Strategic Defense Initiative (if that is the right term for the space based defensive shield).

But the Earth Authorities (and Holt Fasner of all people) have failed to make that any sort of priority here....

That wasn't the question. I'm talking about MiG's detected flying into American airspace. Was the American response to sponsor an idea?

TheWormoftheWorld'sEnd wrote:
Remember the Cold War? I don't know your age so I don't know if you lived through any of it. But what would be the American response if a Soviet MiG was detected flying into American air space? How about a dozen?

Sorry, I just realised that you misunderstood my point (because the wording was ambiguous).

I'm not suggesting that the presence of one Amnion battle cruiser wouldn't be regarded as a threat - clearly it was and it would be. I'm suggesting I had difficulties with the failure to make any preparations for that eventuality - given the nature of the Gap drive it was clearly possible that such a thing could occur, even if it were suicidal.

Barnetto wrote:

TheWormoftheWorld'sEnd wrote:
Remember the Cold War? I don't know your age so I don't know if you lived through any of it. But what would be the American response if a Soviet MiG was detected flying into American air space? How about a dozen?

Sorry, I just realised that you misunderstood my point (because the wording was ambiguous).

I'm not suggesting that the presence of one Amnion battle cruiser wouldn't be regarded as a threat - clearly it was and it would be. I'm suggesting I had difficulties with the failure to make any preparations for that eventuality - given the nature of the Gap drive it was clearly possible that such a thing could occur, even if it were suicidal.

We were all "prepared" for the eventuality of nuclear war. But we weren't psychologically prepared for it. Not many were. Maybe some nuts hiding in fall-out shelters all their lives. And really, the Amnion were considered worse than the Soviets, far worse, provoking a kind of terror that went all the way down to the core of what makes one a human being.

TheWormoftheWorld'sEnd wrote: We were all "prepared" for the eventuality of nuclear war. But we weren't psychologically prepared for it. Not many were. Maybe some nuts hiding in fall-out shelters all their lives. And really, the Amnion were considered worse than the Soviets, far worse, provoking a kind of terror that went all the way down to the core of what makes one a human being.

Absolutely, totally agree with that. And SRD did a great job of portraying it.

But the Earth of the Gap Series had the capacity to have technologically done much more to prepare itself defensively to an Amnion ship appearing out of the Gap. And given the fear level, I found it difficult to buy the scenario in which the Earth hadn't done more to prepare itself (militarily) for such an eventuality.

But the pay-off was the ability to write the last book in the series which wouldn't have been possible without that scenario - so all is forgiven.

Barnetto wrote:

TheWormoftheWorld'sEnd wrote: We were all "prepared" for the eventuality of nuclear war. But we weren't psychologically prepared for it. Not many were. Maybe some nuts hiding in fall-out shelters all their lives. And really, the Amnion were considered worse than the Soviets, far worse, provoking a kind of terror that went all the way down to the core of what makes one a human being.

Absolutely, totally agree with that. And SRD did a great job of portraying it.

But the Earth of the Gap Series had the capacity to have technologically done much more to prepare itself defensively to an Amnion ship appearing out of the Gap. And given the fear level, I found it difficult to buy the scenario in which the Earth hadn't done more to prepare itself (militarily) for such an eventuality.

But the pay-off was the ability to write the last book in the series which wouldn't have been possible without that scenario - so all is forgiven.

You agree with me, and then you go on to disagree with me. The fear element over-rode the Earth's military capability, for example, having the technology but being afraid to use it.

TheWormoftheWorld'sEnd wrote:

You agree with me, and then you go on to disagree with me. The fear element over-rode the Earth's military capability, for example, having the technology but being afraid to use it.

[/quote]

OK - double apologies - I guess I need things spelled out explicitly to understand them!

I completely and utterly agree with the starting premise - but (as you will have guessed!) I disagree on what actions are most likely to have flowed from that premise ie I would have expected the building of more defensive military installations (like Reagan's reaction). This is potentially the whole Earth against one Amnion ship!

And I didn't read anything in the nature of the Earth military society in the Gap Series (as orchestrated especially by Holt Fasner and carried out by Warden, Min etc) that would have lead to some form of psychological freeze when it came to the need for preparations for possible war with the Amnion.

And as far as I can recall, the Ancillary Documentation tried to explain the lack of military defensive preparations by reference to the fact that the Gap Drive had distorted people's perceptions of space. Space was unimaginably large - places were unimagibably far away - and yet the Gap Drive meant (paradoxically) that those distances could be by-passed. It's the jump to the next bit of the argument that I failed to buy into. That the military failed to appreciate that risk and act on it. The populace at large might choose to ignore it - hide their heads in the sand - but not the military.

(Though there may also be a suggestion - can't recall now - that Holst Fasner had simply been unwilling to spend the necessary amounts on defence?)

OK, I've done my best to explain myself - it was just the impression that I had going into the last book.

Please don't tell me I've misunderstood you a third time - it's not good for my self-esteem on a Monday!