What's Happening

Troperville

Tools

collapse/expand topics back to Literature/VorkosiganSaga

 

jatay3
topic
09:21:00 PM May 1st 2013
What is the point of Vor insisting that they are "a military caste not an aristocracy." Isn't that pretty much the definition of aristocracy in almost every culture that has one?
JimCambias
07:24:57 PM Sep 28th 2013
I think the idea is that they serve a vital and personally dangerous role in society. How true that is, of course, is debatable.
jatay3
topic
11:47:06 AM Mar 8th 2013
Why does no one note that the Betans are merchants of death? Surely it sounds odd for people whose prime export is weapons to condemn Barryarans as barbaric? At least they have the decency to risk their own lives when they make mayhem.
DSample
02:45:47 PM Sep 29th 2013
What makes you think that Beta's prime export is weapons? Weapons get mentioned a lot, because the early books were military SF, but they only make up a part of their exports. Beta exports high tech of all kinds, and they are also pretty picky about who they sell to.
roxana
03:33:31 PM Jan 13th 2014
Maybe the fact that every new weapon that appears in the series seems to have originated on Beta? And their tech tends to get into all kinds of hands after that first sale. I imagine they need the money to support their welfare state.
AnotherGuy
09:18:14 AM Feb 10th 2014
Betans, for one, invented the uterine replicator, so, yes, they're not just about weapons tech. There are Jackson's Whole houses that specialize in weaponry, including one that does bioweaponry.
Jordan
topic
03:25:28 PM Jul 18th 2012
I see there's been discussion of whether the following is a Sherlock Holmes Shout-Out:

  • And a not so subtle one in a rephrase of Holmes famous 'You have been in Afghanistan I perceive."
    To the former Lady Donna: "Lord Dono, you have been to Beta Colony I perceive."

I think it is, and is along the lines of a similar joke used in A Study in Emerald. Basically, the original quote is the very first Sherlock Scan- which deduced Watson served in Afghanistan based upon obscure clues. Miles uses the same wording, but in this case, he's deducing something obvious (someone who had a sex change obviously went to the sex change capital of the universe).

I bring up A Study in Emerald, because that's a Holmes pastiche that likewise has a joke about the Sherlock Scan being used for obvious or unusual deductions (i.e. the narrator being in Afganistan based on the fact he was obviously tortured by an Eldritch Abomination/ a foreign prince identified by his multiple limbs and green blood).

DSample
05:43:09 PM Jul 18th 2012
In Miles' case he is also just confirming something that he already knew. He had been told that Lady Donna had just returned from Beta Colony. I do think that Bujold meant for this line to be Miles paraphrasing Holmes.
Xtifr
05:54:49 PM Jul 18th 2012
edited by Xtifr
I think it's pushing it to call it a shout out. I admit that it might be—in fact, I recognized the echo when I first read it—but it's also just something you might expect the character to say in that circumstance. Without Word of God to back it up, it seems too speculative. (It's also not a particularly well-known Holmes line, unlike, say, comments about dogs and nights.)

eta: at the very least, I disagree with the "not-so-subtle" part; I think it's so subtle that I can't be sure it's there! ;)
JBK405
06:40:34 PM Jul 18th 2012
Xtifr hit the nail for why I keep deleting it. Sure, it might be a Shout-Out, but it also might not be. "Genius and wonder" is at least a specific use of the same adjectives in the same form, very few things are described as such. Commenting that somebody has been somewhere, particularly when you've been told they've been somewhere, just seems like a thing that somebody says.
roxana
06:33:37 AM Jul 19th 2012
Frankly I find it much less subtle then the 'genius and wonder' line since 'You have been in Afghanistan I perceive is the the first thing Holmes ever says to Watson. However I will bow to the majority.
Xtifr
01:23:56 PM Jul 19th 2012
edited by Xtifr
It may be less obscure (and indeed, I doubt I would have recognized the "genius and wonder" one if it hadn't been pointed out), but that doesn't necessarily make it less subtle.

eta: of course, if someone wanted to try to obtain Word of God on the matter, that would definitely change things. Bujold is hardly a recluse, and she might well respond to a question.
roxana
09:02:54 AM Jul 21st 2012
How about putting in YMMV?
Jordan
12:54:35 PM Jul 21st 2012
It's not a YMMV trope though, is it? I agree that it seems likely to be a Holmes Shout-Out, but can see the reasons for leaving it off. Would be cool if someone would write Bujold to ask/confirm (I'm busy at present).
Xtifr
08:53:47 PM Jul 21st 2012
Shout-outs are borderline trivia in any case, and I see little point in obsessing over catching them all, but if we really wanted to, I bet that this book alone, dedicated "To Jane, Charlotte, Georgette, and Dorothy", has a whole bunch that we've missed. I've read most of Jane, and a fair amount of Georgette and Dorothy, but not recently enough to spot what shout-outs there may be; still, I'm confident they're there.
roxana
09:25:14 AM Jul 24th 2012
I've read all of Jane, Charlotte's most famous and some of Georgette's and can't say I've noticed shout outs to any of them. Who the heck is 'Dorothy'?
Xtifr
04:22:29 PM Jul 24th 2012
roxana
12:43:56 PM Jul 25th 2012
Okay I really haven't noticed any Peter Wimsey shout outs.
Jordan
06:20:45 PM Jul 25th 2012
Miles relationship with Ekatrian (sorry, not sure how to spell her name) is pretty close to Lord Peter's relationship with Harriet Vane- same kind of idea of how the guy is kind of a savior and the woman isn't really comfortable with the idea of starting a relationship with someone they feel indebted to.

And I'd say generally that after settling down in Komarr and A Civil Campaign, Miles becomes a fair amount like Peter in personality (a "gentleman detective").
DSample
10:05:17 PM Sep 12th 2012
There is also Ekaterin's maiden name: Vorvayne
Jordan
10:12:13 PM Sep 12th 2012
Wow, never knew/noticed that. That's a pretty obvious hint.
roxana
topic
08:38:19 AM Jul 17th 2012
Am I the only troper to have raised hackles over Bujold's characterization of natural gestation and childbirth as 'dangerous and undesirable'? In a society where they revive the dead and give people new nervous systems all the old medical dangers must have been eliminated. Extracting ovum isn't exactly non-intrusive and free of medical hazard (ask any woman undergoing fertility treatment!).

And why is it that Betan WOMEN (and hermaphrodites) get government mandated contraceptive implants? Why not the MEN instead? Or also?? Last time I looked it takes two to make a baby! Nothing intrusive about the government REQUIRING you to get an artificial implant in your body - oh no! While socially mandated chastity and monogamy are JUST AWFUL!

Dear GOD!
JBK405
08:44:27 AM Jul 17th 2012
Roxana, I think you're confusing a character viewpoint with an author viewpoint. To my knowledge Bujold has never in real life said "Natural birth is disgusting and should be stamped out as soon as humanly possible," and she has never said "Beta is my ideal world and I wholeheartedly endorse all their social practices." There's many different societies in the universe, each of which have their own viewpoint on things like sex and reproduction, and to my knowledge Bujold hasn't pointed to any said that they are absolutely correct.

Also, live-birth is more dangerous than a uterine replicator given the dangers of the world. Life is dangerous. There are car accidents, food poisoning, even just accidentally falling down the stairs. A replicator keeps the baby safe and secure and away from all the natural hazards (Although it does bring up all sorts of new hazards, like what if the power goes out, or there's no staff to extract it at the end of the cycle, etc.).
roxana
01:16:16 PM Jul 18th 2012
And the serious squickiness of getting your ova extracted. Betans do seem to be detaching themselves from nature as much as possible. Perhaps an inevitable result of having to live in artificially created arcologies but Cordelia's Betan bigotry REALLY gets to me. I still want to know why it's the WOMEN who get their bodies messed with and men get off scott free.
JBK405
06:43:09 PM Jul 18th 2012
Cultural baggage. There's criticism of women in real life for using birth control (Being on the pill can get you labelled "Slut") but I've never heard the same applied to a man who uses birth control (A condom). Beta is a relatively nice society, with a lot of equality, but nobody (Not even Cordelia within the series) thinks it's perfect.
roxana
06:37:28 AM Jul 19th 2012
I'd mind less if they'd just admit that the chief advantage of uterine replicators is convenience because there is no question that pregnancy does cramp a woman's style. It's the relentless demonization of 'body birth' as primitive and dangerous that raised my hackles. One cannot but notice that Beta's 'unisex' society depends on eliminating female biology as much as possible to bring them closer to the 'male' norm.

roxana
11:56:58 AM Jul 20th 2012
And nobody seems to be addressing - or even considering - the elist nature of the 'benefits' of uterine replicators which are CLEARLY limited to the more affluent middle classes and above.
JBK405
12:17:55 PM Jul 20th 2012
On Beta I'm pretty sure they're universal, everybody has access to uterine replicator's if they want to use one as part of their basic healthcare (Just like nobody does not have a com console in the home).
roxana
09:03:46 AM Jul 21st 2012
I was thinking about Barrayar. Clearly cost IS an issue there.
JBK405
09:07:24 AM Jul 21st 2012
Oh, quite true, but Barrayar is still a caste-based society, they've got social issues coming out the wazoo.
roxana
09:23:09 AM Jul 24th 2012
So does Beta, or at least civil liberties issues. Freewheeling sexual mores are a good way to distract people from the freedoms they DON'T have. Not to mention a president that nobody seems to have voted for. Hmmmm.
DSample
10:17:58 PM Sep 12th 2012
Replicator use isn't universal on Beta. Bujold says that it's about 3:1 vitro:vivo, in Barrayar. Cordelia's brother was vivo, and her sister-in-law chose in-vivo births for her children.

Cordelia's own dislike for them comes from bitter experience, both with Miles' poisoning, and the birth of Ivan. She herself wasn't opposed to them, in principle, at the beginning of Barrayar.
roxana
09:21:03 AM Sep 24th 2012
And that's another thing; granted Miles was poisoned because she was but if he'd been in her womb she wouldn't have had to sneak into enemy territory to rescue him. IMO her personal experience pretty much exposes the flaws of BOTH systems.
Xtifr
12:22:43 PM Sep 24th 2012
edited by Xtifr
Guys, the discussion page is supposed to be about the article, not the subject. Unless this debate is aimed at figuring out which tropes go here, it should probably be moved to the forum thread, here.
jatay3
topic
11:31:53 AM Mar 19th 2012
Where did this article get the idea that the characters were socially liberal compared with those of other Military Science-Fiction? It seems to me that Eric Flint goes a lot farther in that direction.

Most of the characters here seem reasonably happy with a society whose mores are roughly comparable to those of nineteenth century Eastern Europe. The most socially liberal thing they do is to work against anti-disabled prejudice. Which is socially liberal for Barrayar but not for most reader's countries.
JBK405
11:36:45 AM Mar 19th 2012
The stories endorse sexual tolerance, non-traditional gender roles and reassignment surgery, and a benevolent representative government. Barrayar might still be a backward society, but the "message" (If there was a message to take away from this) is that this is a problem.
jatay3
12:10:28 PM Mar 19th 2012
edited by jatay3
Again, they are "socially liberal" by Barryaran standards. The author comes from a country where one of the foremost socially conservative speakers is a woman who brags about how many moose she can shoot, and where being against the infanticide of cripples is closer to being a socially conservative cause than to a socially liberal cause. And no known socially liberal or socially conservative wants to be ruled by an emperor. Cordelia is the only character that could count as socially liberal by the reader's standards as opposed to in-verse standards.
jatay3
12:45:02 PM Mar 19th 2012
edited by jatay3
The article talked of the characters as well as the message. The characters were not socially liberal by modern standards; Aral is very much like a typical nineteenth century monarchist, and would be recognized by Winston Churchill, Gustav Mannerheim, or Captain von Trapp. Simon is a strategic technician. And Ivan is just a courtier. Both are pretty much apolitical, but insofar as they have political opinions they are more or less happy with their society. And all the Armsmen are satisfied to be Battle Butler s. Miles seems fairly mild in his political opinions; he is certainly perfectly satisfied to be an aristocrat.
Xtifr
05:13:41 PM May 29th 2012
Um, pretty much everyone who's not from Barrayar itself would seem to qualify—not just Cordelia. Betans in particular, but Cordelia's not even the only Betan among the main characters—there's also Bel Thorne. Jackson's Whole may have a thoroughly messed-up political system, but Jacksonians are pretty liberal overall, as evidenced by Lord Mark. Cetegandans have their highly stratified society, but as far as matters that don't cross class lines, they seem to be extremely liberal. Even Komarrans, despite being notionally members of the Barrayaran Empire, are fairly liberal. Nobody in the Dendarii fleet seems to mind working with a hermaphrodite, and Eli Quinn is only briefly fazed to meet a man from a single-sex planet.

Funny how in your attempt to disprove it, you limited yourself to discussing only Barrayaran characters—the only ones who wouldn't qualify. (Although Miles himself seems to try, no doubt because of his mother's influence, plus all the time he spent with the fleet, pretending to be full-Betan.)
Jordan
09:14:59 AM Jul 17th 2012
I think I might have added that at some point, based on my understanding that most military science fiction authors can't go five pages without talking about how terrible liberals are. That being said, it's funny that on a re-read of The Warrior's Apprentice, I noticed how Beta seemed to be presented (at least through the POV of Miles and other Barryarans) as a case of Political Correctness Gone Mad.

I've also noticed that Bujold seems to have a thing for gay (or at least bay-leaning bi) characters ending up marring people of the opposite sex, so not really sure of her actual social views...

I do think that overall, characters have pretty socially liberal views. Not so sure now of economic ones. I haven't read up to the present, but my impression was that Miles seems relatively sympathetic toward the idea of equality of outcome, albeit in a noblesse oblige kind of way, and while Mark is something of a Crazy Survivalist libertarian, his actions are also somewhat in that direction.
roxana
10:09:45 AM Sep 25th 2012
Seeings as how Cordelia and Cordelia's views are depicted as the ultimate in enlightenment and wisdom I'd definitely go for 'liberal' in terms of sexual morality, conservative in terms of value of human life, and undecided re: economic liberty.
jatay3
topic
03:09:28 PM Mar 16th 2012
edited by jatay3
Just for fun, why not compare the different worlds with the Seven Deadly Sins:

  • Barryar=Wrath
  • Beta=Lust
  • Cetaganda=Pride
  • Jacksons Whole=Avarice

What do you think? What would fit the other three?
FastEddie
moderator
03:14:21 PM Mar 16th 2012
Kibou-daini ("New Hope") has to be Sloth.
JBK405
03:26:51 PM Mar 16th 2012
This page is for discussing changes to the article. Discussing the work itself belongs on the forum.
FastEddie
moderator
09:22:16 PM Mar 16th 2012
Where did you get that idea?
jatay3
10:32:48 PM Mar 7th 2013
Actually I forget. It just seems amusing.
Kalaong
topic
04:28:17 PM Jan 30th 2012
I've been trying to see Bujold's point in creating Jackson's Whole - an "anarchist dystopia" with "no government", ruled by the profitmongering Houses of "pirates" and "criminals". She may be missing the point there - government by criminals is still government. What's the difference between the House Lords and Varadar Tau, the first Emperor of Barrayar, who explicitly started out as a bandit and became a ruler through force of arms? Barrayar is superior simply because they have a unified form of domination, enforcing prejudice against women and the disabled? She at least admits that the liberal utopia of Beta Colony practices Mind Control. But she never gives the Jacksonians any credit for refusing to see a difference between state-sponsored violence and back-street violence?
JBK405
07:34:45 PM Jan 30th 2012
This page is for discussing changes to the article, not for talking about the work in general. We have the forums for that.
Kalaong
01:18:05 PM Feb 20th 2012
I'm trying to get somewhere in the vicinity of Hypocrite and/or Not So Different without pidgeonholing.
donaithnen
08:49:10 AM Feb 29th 2012
That's really a stretch. First off, Barrayar's government is not "enforcing prejudice against women and the disabled." Those are cultural attitudes that were already present that the current government is trying to correct for. Second, a lot of people _do_ see a difference between "state-sponsored violence" and "back-street violence." Those people would rather live in a society where there are a set of laws that apply to everyone, clearly spelling out what is allowed and what isn't, and what the punishments are for breaking those laws. Especially if along with those laws comes a set of rights. As opposed to "you can do whatever you want as long as you don't piss off someone stronger than you." Third, "X used to be like Y" is not a good "Not So Different" setup. The key being "used to be". "I've changed" is one of the classic rejoinders to the "We're not so different" accusation. If one of the Houses achieved total domination on Jackson's Whole and spent a century or two working out a relatively fair and consistent legal system _then_ they would be pretty much the same as Barrayar. Finally it's a fallacy to think that any form of government is perfect (or at least no counter-examples have been found so far.) Beta Colony provides a lot of benefits to its citizens, but not free of cost. Every form of government meets certain needs and fails to meet others, so how "good" it is depends on what you want out of your government. If you prefer back-street violence to the rule of law then Jackson's Whole _is_ your utopia, but the rest of us would prefer to live on Barrayar or Beta Colony.

Jordan
09:24:45 AM Feb 29th 2012
Good points. Also, a couple other things. I think to some degree Miles is an Unreliable Narrator. I mean his ancestry is Barrayaran and Betan, so of course they come across pretty well, which is a bit odd given some of Barrayar's past history.

Also, I get the impression that Komarr and Escobar (and probably some other places) are quite libertarian/free market oriented, and they are presented positively, so I'm not sure Bujold is completely using Jackson's Whole to attack/strawman that kind of society- Jackson's Whole is a bad example of that type (by way of comparison, I think that to an extent, Cetaganda is the bad example of the authoritarian type).

Finally, I haven't read the most recent novel to see if this is continued, but I got the impression that Mark is presented as a good person who endorses some of the Jacksonian ethos (the non-evil parts).
jatay3
03:07:34 PM Mar 16th 2012
edited by jatay3
Barrayar comes across as quite flawed. It simply comes across as a society with virtues as well as flaws. Miles admitted Barrayar's flaws quite plainly; he was a fairly conspicuous victim after all(even though being a prince kind of evened things out). Actually what I liked was that the viewpoint character was not from a United Space of America and had the perspective of a viewpoint society that would be strange to the reader. It allows for a certain mental stretch.
Kalaong
12:37:09 AM May 29th 2012
The difference between state-sponsored violence and back-street violence is the difference between taxes and protection money - very little.
jatay3
03:26:47 PM Mar 8th 2013
Barryarans clearly consider the system legitimate and consider themselves a part of it. Peasants take pride in once having been soldiers, and celebrate the Emperor's Birthday. No one celebrates the birthday of a crime lord.

A closer analogy to a protection racket would be Komarr but not Barryar itself as Komarr is ruled by authorities alien to it.

As for State-sponsored violence being the same as backstreet violence, that is clearly not the case; it takes different forms and has different goals. In any case the proper term is physical force, not violence; violence comes from the same root as violation and thus in itself implies illegitimacy. Now if you are an absolute pacifist presumably you think all physical force is illegitimate. But most people in fact are not.
Iaculus
03:26:57 PM Mar 9th 2013
The difference between state-sponsored violence and back-street violence is the difference between taxes and protection money - very little.

A mafia racket seldom offers education, healthcare, minority protection, or any form of basic social safety net. Admittedly, Barrayar isn't very good at much of that either, but that's because the books very much present it as a former feudal kleptocracy that's trying to stop being one. As for Beta Colony mind control... you may have to remind me of that bit.
sablesword
09:45:26 PM Sep 3rd 2013
Word of God is that Jackson's Whole is a Take That against anarchy/anarcho-capitalism: "Everybody says they want a world with no government. Well, here's a world with no government. How do you like it?"

JBK405
topic
08:04:51 AM Jan 1st 2012
edited by JBK405
Me and donaithnen have been going back and forth for a while over whether or not Aral Vorkosign is an example of the But Not Too Bi trope, with me arguing against and donaithnen arguing for. We've apparently reached an impasse, and instead of just cursing at each other, we've actually decided to get outside commentary (Can you believe that?).

My argument boils down to the fact that, throughout the series, Aral is only involved in one single romantic relationship (Cordelia, obviously). But Not Too Bi is when a character claims to be bi, but their relationships present in the work are predisposed towards one gender or the other and is almost a case of Informed Ability, talking about it but never showing it. I agree that Aral was never shown in a relationship with a man, which is almost the textbook definition of Informed Ability (Talk about it, but it never happens), except that's going to be automatic for any story where a character only has one relationship. If Cordelia had been male then it'd be same situation, Aral would still be But Not Too Bi in the other direction. The trope can't apply when you haven't seen multiple relationships since then we can't trace it, we can't look at numbers, at writing style, at matching the authors words with actions, etc. The trope can't fit without more relationships; with only one relationship it's just a non-connection.

donaithnen, you're argument?
donaithnen
12:59:18 PM Jan 9th 2012
To me, as it seems to be described on the trope page, But Not Too Bi is not about the actions of the motivations of the character per se, it is about the use of bisexuality as a tool by the author. It applies when the author decides that the character trait of being bisexual would add something to a character (depth, drama, humor, whatever) but for whatever reason chooses to minimize that character's relation with one of the sexes. The trope page lists a number of ways in which that can be done, but the relevant one in Aral's case is example #1, "Time: Alice used to date or sleep with both sexes, but there is no indication that she does so now." Yes, there are reasons internal to the story why Aral doesn't get involved with males in the present, but the author chose to have it be that way. Bujold could have had Aral involved in a male relationship when he met Cordelia and dealt with the resulting drama, or she could drop hints that Aral was still attracted to other men, even if he never acted on it because he was faithful to Cordelia. But whatever her reasons Aral's bisexuality has never been relevant except as part of Aral's history, and has barely even been mentioned since "Barrayar."
JBK405
03:00:19 PM Jan 9th 2012
edited by JBK405
I think I must have drastically misunderstood what you were trying to say when we were talking in private messages, because when I read it all together your point is quite cogent.
Falco
06:57:17 PM Jan 9th 2012
FWIW, his history/past relationship with Ges Vorrutyer forms a significant subplot in the first book.
donaithnen
01:11:08 PM Jan 10th 2012
Yes, but only the history, nothing actually happens in the present. In "Barrayar" someone tries to taunt Cordelia using that history. After that i believe it's brought up once more in the next ten books, and even then only as an aside. That's why it qualifies under case #1, he used to be actively bisexual, but doesn't demonstrate any such traits now. Bujold used his bisexuality to good effect in the first book or two, but after that for whatever reason she didn't want to deal with it anymore. This is definitely a case of Tropes Are Not Bad. Bujold has demonstrated elsewhere that she's not afraid of dealing with LGBT issues, she didn't just throw the bisexuality in there for the shock value and then drop it. It's possible that she felt that delving into it more might have turned off some readers, but it's at least as likely that it just wasn't a direction she wanted to take Aral in. But whatever the reason she did use the character trait in the way described by the trope.
Falco
06:44:28 PM Jan 10th 2012
edited by Falco
*shrugs* I don't particularly care but he simply becomes less important as a character in the following books (as Miles becomes central) hence we have no idea what's happening in Aral's world or mind. Its not that his bisexuality gets sidelined...the whole character gets sidelined. Is that the same thing?
SylviaSybil
06:26:21 PM Feb 22nd 2012
I think Aral fits the trope. He definitely fits #1 of the But Not Too Bi criteria, in that he used to have a boyfriend, but had already broken up with him by the time the series began. I also think he fits #3 because Vorrutyer was a Depraved Bisexual, which implies a value judgment on his relationships with men vs. women since the boyfriend was a homicidal psychopath and the girlfriend was the love of his life.
jatay3
03:03:01 PM Mar 16th 2012
The only time I remember it coming up, was a silly gossip mentioning it at a party in Barrayar. But I haven't read the whole series yet.
SylviaSybil
10:41:17 PM Mar 16th 2012
Well... 1) If you're referring to the party near the beginning of Barrayar, it wasn't silly gossip. It was a deliberate attempt to destroy Aral's marriage by exploiting his wife's homo/biphobia, foiled by the fact that Cordelia (unlike the average Barrayaran) is not actually homo/biphobic. It's a plot point because it provides Cordelia with reason to suspect Vordarian of working against them. Aral's bisexuality is also a plot point in Shards of Honor, as the villain is his ex-boyfriend and, due to the failed relationship, hates both him and his new girlfriend.

2) I don't think the relative importance of the trope to the overall plot of the work makes a difference when including it on the work page. We can list a trope that's only mentioned in one sentence as easily as a trope that is explored in depth across the entire work. So even if it is just silly gossip, that doesn't disqualify it from being listed.
donaithnen
topic
11:01:06 AM Nov 8th 2011
"Arguably" for Uterine Replicators. The example was not using the word "Arguably" in the sense warned against in "Examples Are Not Arguable." Uterine Replicators are clearly present in the series, it's just arguable whether one wants to consider them the "The central technological innovation of the series." Removing just the word "Arguably" doesn't improve anything, it only changes it from something that's definitely true to something people might argue over.
Kurtulmak
topic
08:41:55 PM Oct 31st 2011
Warning: Tropes and subpages may contain unmarked spoilers.

Is there a good reason for this other than sheer laziness?
JBK405
08:44:55 PM Oct 31st 2011
To my knowledge, no.
GymQuirk
topic
05:11:18 PM Aug 31st 2011
Just to test the waters, has the series reached the Loads and Loads of Characters threshold yet? (The number of characters that have appeared in at least two stories and have a significant role in at least one of them is easily over 20.)
DSample
05:43:48 PM Aug 31st 2011
I think so.

I've also been thinking that we ought to start a characters page.
GymQuirk
06:07:32 PM Aug 31st 2011
A Character Sheet was put up a week or two ago. There's even a link button on the main page, but I suppose I could insert another link toward the end of the main article text.
AnotherGuy
09:19:02 AM Feb 10th 2014
There's a Wiki for the series, too. Seems to still be in construction, but already they have loads of character profiles.
back to Literature/VorkosiganSaga

TV Tropes by TV Tropes Foundation, LLC is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License.
Permissions beyond the scope of this license may be available from thestaff@tvtropes.org.
Privacy Policy