Today we are once again going to talk about the Honor Harrington series, and once again, I’m going to complain about it. I’m worried this might give readers the impression that I dislike this series, which is truly not the case. David Weber’s Honorverse might genuinely be one of my all-time favorite series, and it’s certainly one of the most influential in terms of my own development as a reader and writer of science fiction. But the problem is, what Weber does right is often not very interesting to talk about—he is a very skilled writer of space battles, of compelling political melodrama, and of simple but memorable character dynamics–while what he does wrong often fascinates me. The politics of Honor Harrington is yet another case of this, though perhaps not in the way you expect. Weber is something of a libertarian (specifically the kind of libertarian who goes so far around he becomes a monarchist, which is oddly common among science fiction writers), and the politics of his books are often blatantly didactic in how they approach and frame the issues. This can be frustrating, but it is the prerogative of a writer to shape their world how they wish.
But what I cannot get over is the Watsonian explanations and description of how the Star Kingdom of Manticore is supposed to function, which despite being well-written and explained at length, generally make absolutely no sense at all. This failure of political storytelling is interesting to me, not as something to make fun of or attack, but because I think it illustrates some common pitfalls of writing and worldbuilding, and the ways in which the author sometimes is unable or unwilling to confront the implications of their own creations.
Let’s dive in.
Continue reading
Goldwag's Journal on Civilization 