To prevent humans from doing further harm to their planet or to themselves, the Marq ssan render all silicon-based technology useless. To regain the tech that this future society depends on, the Marq ssan demand that each and every country send three female representatives to negotiate. In the US, former spy, current history teacher Kay is tapped for the "honor". She is prepared for any eventuality except the one she finds: that the Marq ssan are truly aliens, and her only allies.

This was a frustrating book. I was excited by the set-up. What would life be like in a city without telephones, transportation, elevators, computers or tv? Would living in a city become untenable? What would take the place of instantaneous communication--runners? bike messengers? What about food--would people start growing their own on rooftops? And leisure activities--without tv or the internet, and with most of the jobs shut down (thanks to no tech), how would people pass the time?
None of these questions are answered.

I did like the aliens. They are as disquieted and disgusted by human biology as humans find them. The aliens that work most closely with the women find themselves changing; they become more active, less concerned with concensus, and more bold. I was glad to see that the situation was hard on the aliens, as well, instead of the usual portrayal of their god-like benevolence. ( )

I enjoy reading science-fiction written by women as the perspective is often very different from male dominated sci-fi. So when I heard about Alanya to Alanya and read the synopsis I was intrigued and eager to start reading. I liked the idea of aliens coming to a dystopian future earth to help humankind change and improve their societies. The idea of the aliens demanding to negotiate only with female representatives of each country is intriguing, what could women achieve without all the testosterone-laden power games men play? I was also interested to see how this dystopian future copes with the loss of technology due to an EMP, which is emitted by the aliens. The aliens do this in order to destabilise the world so as to urge humankind to find a new and better way of functioning. Unfortunately the author barely touches on these issues. Instead of a science fiction novel we rather have a badly written novel that uses a science-fiction platform as a voice for post 70’s feminism.
I just couldn’t buy into this dystopian future, where women are powerless and thoroughly dominated by all powerful, evil men. Every male character is thoroughly despicable and the female characters, even well educated, strong women in high positions, are just puppets of the male “executives” with seemingly no will of their own. The protagonist is one dimensional and her evolution from powerless female under the thumb of the ruling executive class to feminist activist was very predictable. This was a disappointing read, doubt I will be reading the rest of the series.
( )

The book was written in '84 and given that date the author deserves priase for her prescience--she had the growth of the autocratic state pretty well nailed down. The concept is innovative (an alien race tanks earth technology to provide an opportunity for rebuild society according to what we see as feminist principles and they see as just the way things ought to be) and the society believable, but I found the characters to be transparently thin. Women good - men bad. Lower class good, upper class bad, middle class iffy.

Excellent concept, I think, but not very well written. ( )

Excellent political SF. Plus, if you've ever wondered what feminist processing is like, there are some great scenes that will satisfy your curiosity. ( )

This book is fascinating. and awful. I have no idea how to rate it. The subject matter -- an alien species comes to Earth and attempts to help Earth develop saner governance and relations, through approaching only women, and at a time in earth's future history when feminism really is a dirty word -- is fascinating. That the rest of series appears to be set up to address the NEVER addressed question of building utopia, intrigues me. That the writing is just. so. awful. is inescapable. Finding out that the version I read was written in 1984 and actually re-edited by the author in the 1990s means I can't excuse the phenomenally clunky dialogue and emotional reportage as first book syndrome.

I'm giving it 2.5 stars, but I think it might actually deserve a negative rating, for taking such a fascinating idea and executing it with such flatness and gracelessness that I probably won;t read the rest of the cycle. And because that'll eat at the back of my awareness and ultimately force me to read them anyways.

Her editors should be strung up for letting the book through like this. Twice. ( )