Regarding the Silk & Steel website: It will always be there for anyone who may be interested in what the actual Gor books do say, and how a group of fairly intelligent and literate like-minded individuals react to those books and attempt to interact with one another in an honest and straightforward manner. Never have I claimed that the S&S site was anything other than what it was intended to be in the first place: a repository of information about Gor and things Gorean, according to the writings of Norman and the informed opinions of people who respect and admire his work. Though that sort of information is no longer the fad among many "Goreans" on the internet, it remains the only sort of information resource other than the Gor books which I feel is appropriate. Anything else is at best conjecture; at worst, it can become a listing of made-up rules for some game which I personally don't think is worth the time and effort to play.

     This is a matter which I have often considered in the past, and one which I wish to explore a bit further at this time. Now, I am a self-proclaimed defender of the Gor books, and I dearly love them, as frustrating as they sometimes are, what with all of the odd quirks of Norman's literary style. That having been said, I ask the following question:

     If we are told that Goreans "do something" in the books, and they are depicted "doing it" in the books, that certainly makes it "Gorean" in practice if not in origin. Therefore, should we all do it? Or even try to?

     I am often assailed by people who come to me asking for quotes and references to a specific thing, or kind of action, from the Gor books; and later, after I have provided one, I encounter evidence that they are running around attempting to do it since it is now "officially Gorean...the books say so on page such-and-such!"

     Some of these actions are appalling, I add. And occasionally just plain dumb.

     The books contain a lot of references to actions performed by Goreans. A LOT. Thousands, even. But although many of these actions occur on Gor, and certainly exist upon Gor, does that mean we should constantly strive to emulate each and every one of them?

     Tarl has sex with his slave atop the body of a slain sleen at the beginning of Beasts of Gor, getting quite messy in the process. Does that mean we should all engage in sex atop the bodies of dead animals, rather than just their furs?

     Tarl acts like a foppish perfume salesman in Marauders of Gor, in order to conceal his identity to abduct a slave. Does that mean we should do the same, disguising ourselves as others in order to further our own agenda?

     Surbus, from Raiders of Gor, kills slaves whom he finds displeasing. Is being Gorean, therefore, dependant upon our acceptance of that particular practice? Should we kill our own slaves when they displease us?

     Ost, in Outlaw of Gor and later on, in Dancer of Gor, is a total cringing jerk. He betrays those who share his chain in the work mines of Tharna, lies, cheats, steals and is a general coward. But he is Gorean, and does those things upon the surface of Gor. Are we therefore to behave in the same manner as he, to be Gorean? Are we allowed to do so, since "it came from the books?"

     No, I say. While we are ALLOWED to do so, it would be foolish. We should not.

     Tarl had sex with Vella atop a slain sleen because it pleased him, and because there happened to be a sleen in the same room as he, one which he had just slain. He does something similar atop the body of a slain Kur in the book Marauders of Gor. A common Gorean custom? Doubtful. Something which Norman felt, at the time, was a bit kinky and barbaric, and something which Tarl would do at the time? Probably.

     Surbus was described in the text as being monstrous, a man with no regard for human life. Was he allowed to behave that way, upon Gor? Sure. Right up until the time Tarl put an end to him at the point of a sword. Was his behavior common to all men of Gor? Doubtful. Otherwise, why would he be depicted as someone who was universally feared and despised, by his fellow Goreans?

     Ost was a total waste of human skin. Weak, cowardly, and pathetically dishonest and disloyal... and yet he was Gorean. Are Goreans therefore expected to behave so, just because Ost did? Of course not. It might appear in the books, but it appears there for a reason: so that his example, and that of Surbus, can be presented to the reader as behavior antithetical to the manner in which common Goreans behave. Norman goes on to show us how these two men are punished, by other Goreans, for their deviant behavior.

     My point is this: just because it is in the books, does not mean that it is automatically correct in the eyes of the average Gorean. Many such occurances in the books are situational, or are used by Norman to provide a contrasting backdrop to the way in which normal Goreans think and behave.

     Common sense comes into play, here, on all of our parts. One cannot simply QUOTE from a Gor book; one has to READ that book and assign any such quote to its respective context.

     Tarl shoots a ray-gun in the books, too, and Parp, the implanted Priest King agent, smokes a pipe. Tarl dresses a slave up in the garb of a Free Woman in order that her identity and status as a slave might be concealed to smuggle her out of the city, and Tarl eats a can of chili at a campfire in New Hampshire. ALL of these things are depicted in the books, but that does not mean that ray-guns and tobacco and switches and Ranch-Style-Chili-with-Beans are all automatically Gorean in nature, are used by Goreans, or are part of the day to day existence of the typical Gorean.

     These books can and do tell us what being Gorean is all about; but they are not a bible by any means, nor can you randomly quote from them like scripture. Context is the key here; context and an overall knowledge of the type of situations which Goreans face in their lives. Armed with that, we can draw comparisons to situations which occur in our own lives, and bring a bit of Gor, and Gorean philosophy, back to Earth with us.

     The books are a great source of rules and regulations for online role-playing games, I add, particularly in the online medium of IRC where one can go to great lengths to emulate a role-playing environment similar to that of another planet. And if that is all someone is interested in, then let them quote to their heart's content! But once someone walks away from their keyboard, if they wish to be Gorean away from online interaction, they need to figure out how to apply Gorean tenets to situations which do not appear on Gor.

     The way to do this is through a working knowledge of what Norman said in those books, compared and contrasted against the situations we encounter in our own society and offline lives. And in order to do that, one must understand the context in which Norman wrote, and that in which his fictional characters functioned and existed.

     It is a fact that many of the topics which Norman discusses are known and taught in the field of sociology; it is simply that no one chooses to assign them their importance, and most people seem to feel that they can simply sweep all such beliefs and concepts under the rug and ignore them.

     I suspect this particular tack is doomed to fail in a big, big way. We have already seen the backlash of it in many different areas of our societal relations. A "war of the sexes" seems to be occurring, but it is a cold war: however, the number of incidents continues to rise wherein this cold war flares into direct conflict. And in such a conflict, bereft of the protection of laws and customs which have always protected them, the female will lose. And might wind up much worse off than they are right now. Such an occurance would be a huge waste of time and effort, in which everyone loses.

     Why fight it? Why not just accept what we are and work together, walking hand in hand into the next millenium?

     One might ignore the sound of an approaching train; one might refuse to acknowledge the rushing wind which it produces.

     One might even completely disbelieve it, erasing it from one's mind.

     But stand on the tracks in front of it and THEN try to ignore it, and see what happens.

     Personally, I won't be standing in front of that train. I would much rather be riding upon it, heading in the direction which I have been biologically equipped to go in the first place.

     It is stated quite clearly in the Gor books that the Priest-Kings control the development of weapons technology upon Gor, limiting it to hand-to-hand and certain handheld missile devices such as the crossbow. It has been suggested to me that this was done by John Norman to maintain the practice of male domination on Gor. According to this theory, If physical strength rules, then males rule... as in the days when physical strength ruled on Earth. If such technological limitations did not exist, then the weak might rule through means other than physical strength. John Norman allowed other technologies to be equal to, if not better than, those of Earth; just not the means of physical domination and control.

     An interesting theory... but personally, I do not feel that the Priest-Kings limited weapons technology on Gor so that the MALES would dominate the females at all. I think that the Priest-Kings did it so that:

     1) Mankind on Gor would be theoretically unable to reach a point where they could threaten the Priest-Kings, or the existence of the human race, via high tech weaponry. They had, after all, expended a great amount of effort creating and maintaining the Counter-Earth, and certainly would not want to see it reduced to a radioactive cinder through the meddlings of its transplanted inhabitants.

     2) The Priest-Kings felt justified in limiting the weapons technology of the humans on Gor because, to their mind, that maintained and reinforced the natural selection process, which would contribute to the strongest and most adaptive breeding stock for their great societal experiment on Gor. The Priest-Kings seemed unconcerned with the hows and whys of male dominance in the human species, other than as a biological curiosity. Rather, they were more interested in the survival and continued existence of the strongest and most adaptive elements of human society. In the area of close physical conflict, which the Priest-Kings maintained upon Gor as the upper tier of the selection process, it just so happens that the male element of the human dynamic tends to be naturally superior. I am sure that the Priest-Kings found that fact to be rather interesting, and to mirror the developmental factors of many other two-sexed species; nevertheless, I believe that to Misk and the rest this was simply an interesting footnote in the great biological system they maintained and studied.

     I note that it had some very fascinating effects upon the societal dynamic of the humans who dwelled there, upon which Norman expounds at great length. And it is very interesting reading, for the discerning would-be Gorean.

     "No, I would not try to reform man by pretending that my wishes for him were the wishes of Priest-Kings, even though this might be effective for a time, for the wishes that reform man, that make him what he is capable of becoming, and has not yet become, must be his own and not those of another. If man rises, he can do so only on his own two feet."