Let me first of all say that I was given a free copy to review, and that M.C.A. Hogarth is a friend of a friend. Having said that I was reviewing this from a clear perspective, and if I didn't like it, I would simply not write a review on it. I did like it, and a lot of things about it as well.
What's the difference? Well, let me clarify. First, from a pure componented perspective, I liked numerous elements separate of the work as a whole. I like the fact that this story followed the patron model. The author wrote a series of stories, which about 50 paid for because they wanted to see more. Thus, without their interest and input, more would not have been made. I think that in the modern world of the internet, this is the ideal method rather than giving substantial amounts of money to middle men who take a cut and give nothing in return. There are those channels which are good, but there are many who are not. And I favor direct patronage as the highest model.
The second was the fact that this was social science fiction, but it wasn't just that, it was well done. Science fiction is always a method of looking back at ourselves through a prism that is simply not possible in the real world. I learned a lot by watching the Naked Mole rat in the zoo. What the hell? You ask.
Let me clarify. A common criticism in science fiction is that aliens are not sufficiently alien. They should be tentacled horrors rather than humanoid. And yet...did you know that Naked Mole rats have a hive structure? Yes, that's right. They aren't a herb, but have a queen just like certain kinds of insects. Thusly, I have come to find humanoid aliens potentially more plausible than something that would have to evolve an entirely different way of using technology than ourselves. I don't consider the latter impossible, just not as likely as a humanoid. And the aliens Hogarth presents in his story are in many ways like us. There is a distinctly asian feel to their culture, but they are not simply ancient Japan or ancient China with the serial numbers filed off.
No, I argue that the reason the culture feels this way is because it is obviously ancient. Let me give you an example of what I mean. If someone from the 15th century were somehow magically transported to the present day, they would be generally very rude by our standards. They would not do this intentionally, but dozens of elements of etiquette that we take for granted in our society are simply instilled in us by birth. As time progresses society has ways of working things out.
The thing I like so much about the Aphorisms is that it portrays what is obviously on the surface a very static society while at the same time answering any questions I had about how they manage to avoid ossification and thus ultimate destruction. It has a vibrancy beneath the surface that thus legitimizes its longevity.
In other words, Hogarth has created a society I can actually believe in, doing so in the actual format that an alien would write it no less. This feels not a book written by a 21rst century writer set in an alien world, it is written by a distant alien and translated into English.
But the best element of the book is the actual skill of the writing itself. Hogarth knows how to write and does so quite impressively. I highly recommend the book to hard core sci fi readers or those who are interested in philosophical musings in fictional form.
Friday, August 7, 2009
Tuesday, July 28, 2009
Torchwood - Children of Earth
This is an interesting combination of miniseries and third season. And I like it. I've becoming convinced after watching limited series like Cowboy Bebop that sometimes a limited series is just the way to tell a story. Its long enough, and complicated enough, that you just can't make a movie out of it, but it doesn't justify 7 26 episode seasons. Some series do work well enough to do that. I think Firefly was killed in its prime, just like Farscape, in large part not due to profitability but to executive stupidity. In fact, in the case of the latter, I pretty much KNOW it involved interoffice politics rather than anything the fans wanted.
But until fans directly fund such projects, they will always be subject to the whims of Hollywood executives so they better get used to it.
But I digress.
-Limited Spoilers-
The basic premise of this show is, aliens are coming and they want a chunk of Earth's children. 10% exactly. The more shocking thing (revealed in episode 4) is that the aliens want the children because humans 'make good chemicals.' I've seen aliens mess with humanity for an awful lot of reasons, but at the absolute least you have to hand it to Russel T. Davis (creator of Torchwood) in coming up with an extremely creative way of making aliens want to interact with humans. We're the losing half of an intergalactic opium war.
The visuals were stunning. Whoever worked with the children managed to make them act very unchildlike and in large numbers. We're not talking about one or two Halley Joel Osmets here, but whole crowds of kids acting in an extremely creepy fashion.
The acting in general was supurb, as was the writing. The only major complaint I had was the absolute lack of freaking out on the part of the children in Episodes 1-3 (out of 5). Look, I understand how you want to highlight how much of a natural disruption it is to show the children playing one minute and then having them standing their droning alien messages the next, but I think a far more powerful visual would have been to show some children playing, but be sure to show little Timmy cowering in the closet because he's afraid that the aliens are going to get him.
A lot of reviews I've read have said Episode 4 is boring. No. Episode 4 is not boring unless you're stupid. Episode 4 is the most important episode out of the 5. Episode 4 is where we see WHAT WOULD REALLY HAPPEN if this took place. We see politicians acting like politicians. We see the absolute disgusting nature of humanity and it is portrayed in a perfectly believable fashion. Unlike the contrived visual with the children, this one is spot on. It doesn't have to highlight the bad guys to make them look bad, because they're just regular leaders making what they believe to be the only choice they have, while at the same time willfully ignoring the alternatives.
And it also shows what only science fiction can show, which is that, in other areas, our leaders often make decisions like this every single day, and yet no one lifts a finger to stop it. Abstract policy to most people just that, abstract policy, with no real feeling for the consequences until it happens to them.
Anyone who loves science fiction or anyone who wants to point out that abstract policies have real world consequences should see Torchwood Children of Earth.
But until fans directly fund such projects, they will always be subject to the whims of Hollywood executives so they better get used to it.
But I digress.
-Limited Spoilers-
The basic premise of this show is, aliens are coming and they want a chunk of Earth's children. 10% exactly. The more shocking thing (revealed in episode 4) is that the aliens want the children because humans 'make good chemicals.' I've seen aliens mess with humanity for an awful lot of reasons, but at the absolute least you have to hand it to Russel T. Davis (creator of Torchwood) in coming up with an extremely creative way of making aliens want to interact with humans. We're the losing half of an intergalactic opium war.
The visuals were stunning. Whoever worked with the children managed to make them act very unchildlike and in large numbers. We're not talking about one or two Halley Joel Osmets here, but whole crowds of kids acting in an extremely creepy fashion.
The acting in general was supurb, as was the writing. The only major complaint I had was the absolute lack of freaking out on the part of the children in Episodes 1-3 (out of 5). Look, I understand how you want to highlight how much of a natural disruption it is to show the children playing one minute and then having them standing their droning alien messages the next, but I think a far more powerful visual would have been to show some children playing, but be sure to show little Timmy cowering in the closet because he's afraid that the aliens are going to get him.
A lot of reviews I've read have said Episode 4 is boring. No. Episode 4 is not boring unless you're stupid. Episode 4 is the most important episode out of the 5. Episode 4 is where we see WHAT WOULD REALLY HAPPEN if this took place. We see politicians acting like politicians. We see the absolute disgusting nature of humanity and it is portrayed in a perfectly believable fashion. Unlike the contrived visual with the children, this one is spot on. It doesn't have to highlight the bad guys to make them look bad, because they're just regular leaders making what they believe to be the only choice they have, while at the same time willfully ignoring the alternatives.
And it also shows what only science fiction can show, which is that, in other areas, our leaders often make decisions like this every single day, and yet no one lifts a finger to stop it. Abstract policy to most people just that, abstract policy, with no real feeling for the consequences until it happens to them.
Anyone who loves science fiction or anyone who wants to point out that abstract policies have real world consequences should see Torchwood Children of Earth.
Monday, July 20, 2009
Nation - by Terry Pratchet
I have noticed a repeated trend in the British psyche lately trying to recognize the fact that there were an empire for several hundred years. On the one hand, they want to take pride in the fact that they were once a mighty nation, on the other hand, they've grown up and realized that stomping people for economic exploitation is probably not the most morally superior attitude in the world.
Nation is a departure from Pratchet's work in many ways. It is set in the real world, despite hints and shadows at potential supernatural activity that might only be in the minds of the local participants. It answers important questions about culture, nationality, history and the individual. His characters are interesting; the female Daphne and the male Mau. He starts the narrative off with Mau because Mau is the most foreign to most of those who will be reading the book. Mau is a pacific islander (despite a handwavium attempt by the author to pretend that the island and the entire ocean have been made up out of thin air at the end of the book) while Daphne is the unlikely heir to the british empire after a plague killed dozens of other relatives, who ends up shipwrecked on the Island with Mau.
What is fascinating is how the two interact and how the question of the ultimate fate of the island is resolved in the long term. For young adult fiction (or fiction in general) it is quite good and I would highly recommend reading it. Most impressive of all, is that on top of the questions it asks and answers, Pratchet manages to keep his trademark humor throughout.
Nation is a departure from Pratchet's work in many ways. It is set in the real world, despite hints and shadows at potential supernatural activity that might only be in the minds of the local participants. It answers important questions about culture, nationality, history and the individual. His characters are interesting; the female Daphne and the male Mau. He starts the narrative off with Mau because Mau is the most foreign to most of those who will be reading the book. Mau is a pacific islander (despite a handwavium attempt by the author to pretend that the island and the entire ocean have been made up out of thin air at the end of the book) while Daphne is the unlikely heir to the british empire after a plague killed dozens of other relatives, who ends up shipwrecked on the Island with Mau.
What is fascinating is how the two interact and how the question of the ultimate fate of the island is resolved in the long term. For young adult fiction (or fiction in general) it is quite good and I would highly recommend reading it. Most impressive of all, is that on top of the questions it asks and answers, Pratchet manages to keep his trademark humor throughout.
Movie - Harry Potter and the Half Blood Prince
Some have been disappointed by it, some consider it the best movie of the series. I liked it a great deal, and I don't honestly know if I HAVE a favorite movie of the series. I like them all, though I admit I am not a rabid fan, just a fan. I think for me its really a question of admiration for Rowling's storycraft. I've been told that her writing itself is not the most skillful, and I will readily conceed that her building blocks have been used to death in other medium a million times before.
But the skill with which Rowling uses those blocks is utterly amazing. Its like macaroni art put together by Michangelo. The individual components are simply not that impressive, but the artistry of the work itself is undeniable. The plots are pretty transparent despite a valiant effort to make them novel and interesting, but at the same time Rowling does so with a freshness and daring that makes them truly wonderous. Moreover, Rowlings characters are truly human. They behave in human ways and incorporate a larger spectrum of humanity than is to be found in most literature period, much less the YA genre.
Rowling trusts her readers with darkness. She never hides behind the fact that there are dark things out there, and her dark figures do not act like stereotypes (or rather JUST like stereotypes) but like the real thing. More important, her books are an enjoyable read. The movie is no less so.
But the skill with which Rowling uses those blocks is utterly amazing. Its like macaroni art put together by Michangelo. The individual components are simply not that impressive, but the artistry of the work itself is undeniable. The plots are pretty transparent despite a valiant effort to make them novel and interesting, but at the same time Rowling does so with a freshness and daring that makes them truly wonderous. Moreover, Rowlings characters are truly human. They behave in human ways and incorporate a larger spectrum of humanity than is to be found in most literature period, much less the YA genre.
Rowling trusts her readers with darkness. She never hides behind the fact that there are dark things out there, and her dark figures do not act like stereotypes (or rather JUST like stereotypes) but like the real thing. More important, her books are an enjoyable read. The movie is no less so.
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
Backup by Jim Butcher
Yeah. I'll be blunt here.
This is a kickass novella in hardback form. But I feel that Butcher is entering Lucas exploitation levels in selling this thing in hardback form. When I sell something with a lot of white space, I don't include those pages in the cost per page count. This is the kind of novella I would be more than happy to buy when mixed up with other things he's written, or in anthologies with other authors. I've obtained numerous short stories he's written in anthologies because he's my favorite author.
But when a $13.60 hardback book ($20 cover price) is sold then I really feel that my good will as a fan is being exploited.
Which is of course why I checked it out from the library. I'm still supporting the author by encouraging the library to buy more of his stuff, but I'm not being an idiot about the price either.
The basic plot is about an associate of Harry Dresden, Thomas, who helps Harry without his knowledge. Occasionally episodes like this appear in television series, and I like them a great deal. It also adds a fascinating new dimension to the conflict in the Dresdenverse, and it makes absolute perfect sense. In a world where belief makes things real, of course there are things best forgotten, which is where the 'obvlivion war' sets in.
The other thing I like a lot about this book is about how it personalizes a character that is forced to make horrible character altering decisions in the Turn Coat book.
This is a kickass novella in hardback form. But I feel that Butcher is entering Lucas exploitation levels in selling this thing in hardback form. When I sell something with a lot of white space, I don't include those pages in the cost per page count. This is the kind of novella I would be more than happy to buy when mixed up with other things he's written, or in anthologies with other authors. I've obtained numerous short stories he's written in anthologies because he's my favorite author.
But when a $13.60 hardback book ($20 cover price) is sold then I really feel that my good will as a fan is being exploited.
Which is of course why I checked it out from the library. I'm still supporting the author by encouraging the library to buy more of his stuff, but I'm not being an idiot about the price either.
The basic plot is about an associate of Harry Dresden, Thomas, who helps Harry without his knowledge. Occasionally episodes like this appear in television series, and I like them a great deal. It also adds a fascinating new dimension to the conflict in the Dresdenverse, and it makes absolute perfect sense. In a world where belief makes things real, of course there are things best forgotten, which is where the 'obvlivion war' sets in.
The other thing I like a lot about this book is about how it personalizes a character that is forced to make horrible character altering decisions in the Turn Coat book.
Movie: Terminator Salvation
I had heard mixed things about this, plus given the recent series, I was concerned about the studio I thought that produced it, but it turns out that both opinions were incorrect. The movie is actually a lot better than Terminator 3. It had a few flaws, but using the 'movies are fun' argument that justified Transformers 2: Robot Testacles for earning $200 million, I think we can cut this one some slack.
The movie is basically about how John Conner actually becomes the head of the Revolution. It has a lot of action and an interesting side plot about a man who mysteriously shows up who was in suspended animation and then appears naked out of nowhere who makes a significant difference as to whether the good guys succeed or not.
I liked it, but it had a few problems.
Spoilers ahead.
One of the biggest comments I've heard is how easy it was to sneak into the complex. Yeah, well, apparently a lot of other reviewers are moronic, because it is VERY easy to sneak into the main complex of the bad guy when they want you to.
Now, the 'why pick a guy from 1993 who is going to stick out like a sore thumb to lay your trap' is another criticism I hear a lot about this movie. Actually, the 'its so dumb it just might work' defense seems valid to me. I honestly have to wonder just how much proof you'd have to offer someone if you claimed to be from the future and that you were trying to alter the timeline to prevent a disaster. I'd bet that it wouldn't take much proof and that there would be an awful lot of people that would totally fall for it. Plus, maybe Skynet didn't have a lot of bodies lying around when it first started, so it picked the one with the most data lying around.
Now some things were lame.
Skynet is just stupid. The humans always do the best they can with what they have, sometimes against hopeless odds, but Skynet is aware of all the time paradoxes (hence its desire to kill the guy who is going to be John Conner's father) but it doesn't care about temporal paradox and just goes ahead anyway. It also pulls a 'join me, and together we shall rule the galaxy' with the cyborg guy.
Not yet once has anyone tried to make the paradox work via ignroance. For example, in T3, John Conner is revealed in the future to be killed because he was a moron and trusted a T-800 too much. Why can't he just program the robot with false info and send it back that way to maintain the timeline, and then shoot any @#$@#$@# T-800's that suddenly try to become friends with him?
One can hope that might happen, but I'm not holding my breath.
The good news is that at this point, we're entering new territory with these movies. We don't need to keep wondering if Skynet will send yet another crappy robot back in time, because we KNOW it has to happen to avoid temporal paradox.
The movie is basically about how John Conner actually becomes the head of the Revolution. It has a lot of action and an interesting side plot about a man who mysteriously shows up who was in suspended animation and then appears naked out of nowhere who makes a significant difference as to whether the good guys succeed or not.
I liked it, but it had a few problems.
Spoilers ahead.
One of the biggest comments I've heard is how easy it was to sneak into the complex. Yeah, well, apparently a lot of other reviewers are moronic, because it is VERY easy to sneak into the main complex of the bad guy when they want you to.
Now, the 'why pick a guy from 1993 who is going to stick out like a sore thumb to lay your trap' is another criticism I hear a lot about this movie. Actually, the 'its so dumb it just might work' defense seems valid to me. I honestly have to wonder just how much proof you'd have to offer someone if you claimed to be from the future and that you were trying to alter the timeline to prevent a disaster. I'd bet that it wouldn't take much proof and that there would be an awful lot of people that would totally fall for it. Plus, maybe Skynet didn't have a lot of bodies lying around when it first started, so it picked the one with the most data lying around.
Now some things were lame.
Skynet is just stupid. The humans always do the best they can with what they have, sometimes against hopeless odds, but Skynet is aware of all the time paradoxes (hence its desire to kill the guy who is going to be John Conner's father) but it doesn't care about temporal paradox and just goes ahead anyway. It also pulls a 'join me, and together we shall rule the galaxy' with the cyborg guy.
Not yet once has anyone tried to make the paradox work via ignroance. For example, in T3, John Conner is revealed in the future to be killed because he was a moron and trusted a T-800 too much. Why can't he just program the robot with false info and send it back that way to maintain the timeline, and then shoot any @#$@#$@# T-800's that suddenly try to become friends with him?
One can hope that might happen, but I'm not holding my breath.
The good news is that at this point, we're entering new territory with these movies. We don't need to keep wondering if Skynet will send yet another crappy robot back in time, because we KNOW it has to happen to avoid temporal paradox.
Wednesday, July 8, 2009
Movie: Public Enemy
The movie in a nutshell is about the tail end of John Dillinger's criminal career in the early thirties. Since its a basic matter of history, I don't think I'm ruining things by saying that in the end, Dillinger does not drive off into the sunset with a bag of money in the back of his car. Its just not that kind of movie.
This movie proved two things to me: I like the acting of Johnny Depp and Christian Bale. Marion Cotillard does an excellent job as Dilligenger's fascination as well. In fact, I would say she has the most compelling part in the movie, because you can see how an ordinary person with nothing worth focusing on in their life could easily get swept up into the chaos of Dilligenger's world.
I liked the movie. It is probably not the most memorable movie for me, despite the fact that I also enjoyed knowing the time line involved. It does do a sufficient job of showing what a bastard J. Edgar Hoover was. The only thing I REALLY wish that they'd shown was how he edged out Melvin Purvis (played by Christian Bale) who was the guy who actually tracked Dillenger down. J. Edgar Hoover spent a good chunk of his life making sure that no publisher or Hollywood studio would print Purvis's story because Hoover wanted control of the FBI's image and to take all of the glory for himself.
This movie proved two things to me: I like the acting of Johnny Depp and Christian Bale. Marion Cotillard does an excellent job as Dilligenger's fascination as well. In fact, I would say she has the most compelling part in the movie, because you can see how an ordinary person with nothing worth focusing on in their life could easily get swept up into the chaos of Dilligenger's world.
I liked the movie. It is probably not the most memorable movie for me, despite the fact that I also enjoyed knowing the time line involved. It does do a sufficient job of showing what a bastard J. Edgar Hoover was. The only thing I REALLY wish that they'd shown was how he edged out Melvin Purvis (played by Christian Bale) who was the guy who actually tracked Dillenger down. J. Edgar Hoover spent a good chunk of his life making sure that no publisher or Hollywood studio would print Purvis's story because Hoover wanted control of the FBI's image and to take all of the glory for himself.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)