Why is it odder to be critical of the market than to be comparably critical of the temple, the capitol, the legion, the university, or any other way or place of organizing large numbers of people towards a more-or-less common goal?
Picking up on the remark about Weber's Harrington series -- "if one looks very closely, some elements could be interpreted as being critical of" -- seniority promotions in the military, fanatics in the church, bullies in business, academics who've never attempted to apply their theories in practice ... People aren't perfect, and their institutions merely magnify our imperfections. If SF markets are largely driven by American tastes then authors working in that market are certainly aware of the flaws of marketing and capitalism -- perhaps more so than they are aware of the quirks and flaws of, say, parlimentary governance. (Weber's Star Kingdom political portrayals never seem convincing to me (( hmm. that sounds as if the rest of his stuff is; not an impression I'd like to convey on purpose.)) )
criticality
Picking up on the remark about Weber's Harrington series -- "if one looks very closely, some elements could be interpreted as being critical of" -- seniority promotions in the military, fanatics in the church, bullies in business, academics who've never attempted to apply their theories in practice ... People aren't perfect, and their institutions merely magnify our imperfections. If SF markets are largely driven by American tastes then authors working in that market are certainly aware of the flaws of marketing and capitalism -- perhaps more so than they are aware of the quirks and flaws of, say, parlimentary governance. (Weber's Star Kingdom political portrayals never seem convincing to me (( hmm. that sounds as if the rest of his stuff is; not an impression I'd like to convey on purpose.)) )