I’ve tried and failed to get my thoughts out the door on this a bunch of times, but one thing about Worm is that I feel that it isn’t particularly didactic when it comes to its themes of decisive strongwoman authoritarianism vs ossified-but-marginally-more-accountable institutions, it doesn’t have a specific answer, the utility and glaringly obvious failure modes of both dynamics are on display throughout the book and often right on each other’s heels, Taylor’s decisive actions are frequently obviously the correct moral choice given the options available to her but are downstream of the poor decisions she made to get into a bind where she has to act alone, many of the Protectorate’s policies are obviously sound precepts to maintain from, like, a rule-utilitarianism standpoint but don’t survive contact with reality, the capstone of the book is an act of stunning unaccountability that worked but also wasn’t necessarily the only thing that could have worked.
The book doesn’t, to my mind, provide a clear resolution to this question (because there isn’t one) and I don’t think it’s a coincidence that fandom morality debates down this channel are some of the most genuinely heated and aggressive that I’ve seen. My Big Discourse Nightmare Scenario for Worm getting big has never so much been the representational stuff, because I suspect a lot of that would get sniped in the edit now that people’ve been complaining about it for 10 years. It’s the idea of the book catching the attention of people who feel like stories are obligated to answer these questions (and in a specific way!) instead of just raising them or exploring them.
118 notes
·
View notes