PCA/ACA Conference: Day Five and Six (The End)
Well, to wrap up my brief recap of the PCA/ACA conference, I have some general impressions, a discussion of a screening of the director’s cut of Aliens, a few more words about some panels I visited on the last day, and some new reading for the reading list! We’ll do it in that order. Also, I have a post in the works about the presence of science fiction and fantasy in airports, which clearly hinges off of this trip. Look forward to that in the next few days. Now, to the final days of the conference! The conference was pretty much all kinds of awesome. I learned a lot of amazing things and made some great contacts (professional and otherwise). Career-wise, I think this conference has been more influential than any of the others I have attended. I made contacts with two publishers who are working on two separate projects: McFarland and Intellect. The former has a running series of scholarly work on various aspects of science fiction and I may be submitting a proposal to them early next year (once I finish my MA). The publisher of that particular track ran a brief Q&A session where scholars could basically ask questions to the editors involved (very helpful indeed). The second is an academic journal publisher who primarily focuses on film, culture, and horror; the fellow who was there indicated to me, however, that they are trying to put together a science fiction journal (which would make the grand total of serious academic journals for SF to six: Foundation, Extrapolation, Science Fiction Studies, FemSpec, and Science Fiction and Television)–I brought his contact information to some of my professors at the University of Florida (apparently they’re working on building a science fiction track here, which is totally awesome). Additionally, I found out about two book projects that are looking for essays and I intend to submit to both! Beyond that, I had a blast hanging out with people and talking about science fiction and all sorts of other topics. I made some excellent new friends and I may propose a panel next year on ninjas (from an academic standpoint, obviously; yes, there is a lot to say about ninjas). We’ll see. Any emerging scholars out there might consider checking out the PCA/ACA conference next year, which will be in San Antonio, TX. It’ll a lot of fun! Now, for other things. The last night of the conference ended with a viewing of the director’s cut of Aliens, one of the best science fiction movies ever made. I’ve never seen this particular version, and it is certainly enjoyable to see (they added in a few scenes that give more context to the overall narrative, which definitely makes it better). The best part of going to a film screening like this, however, is being in a room full of like-minded fans. Why? Because when you’ve seen a movie like Aliens a few dozen times (or even once), some lines of dialogue in the early parts of the movie actually become quite comical. Take, for example, when Burke says he’ll keep Ripley safe and that they’re going to the colony to destroy, not collect; having seen the movie, you know that’s all a load of bullcrap, and when you’re in a room full of people who know this too, laughter ensues. You should try it. Best film screening ever! Moving on to the recap of the panels: –The most fascinating paper on the last day of the conference dealt with the interesting relationship of various characters to books/literacy in a wide-range of post-apocalyptic fiction. The presenter made an interesting argument that, in post-apocalyptic literature, books and other written mediums become a kind of survival mechanism (at least in some cases). Very interesting approach. –The last panel I saw was actually a roundtable on teaching horror films. I didn’t attend any pedagogical panels at the SWTXPCA conference in February, but I attended this one because it seemed more geared to my interests. I have no idea how I can work in a horror film in a composition course, but the advice they gave was excellent. We’ll see if I can work it out. Reading/Watching List:–Supernatural–Earth Abides–“The Long Emergency”–After London–The Edukators And that’s basically it. The sixth day mentioned in the title was actually my last day in St. Louis; the conference ended on day five. The trip back was pretty much uneventful, but somewhat depressing. I didn’t want to leave. I really enjoyed the conference and I hate going home knowing that so many of these fascinating people are floating out there in other places, inaccessible to immediate conversation. I hope I’ll have the opportunity to meet some of the same folks again in the future (I talk to a number of them online now, but that’s not the same). In any case, that’s all I have. So, back to regular programming! P.S.: I had my first ever Shepherd’s Pie at this conference and also experienced a tapas (small portion) restaurant. The former was pretty freaking good and the latter was tasty, but not quite worth the money; I am not tapas friendly.
J. J. Abrams’ Star Trek: An Addendum (to my review)
Some time ago I posted a scathing review of the new Star Trek movie. That post has since become one of biggest traffic and comment drivers on this blog. Thinking back, I do have some additional thoughts on the movie, and one thought in particular that I think may explain more about why I really dislike the newest film. I am fully aware that time travel has been a staple within the Star Trek universe, what with the fifth movie having a plot centered entirely around that subject (the one with the whales is the fifth, right?). But what concerns me most about the newest Star Trek movie is that its use of time travel is essentially a non-starter. What do I mean by that? The problem with the newest movie is precisely that its time travel narrative essentially makes the entire movie pointless. If it is that easy to manipulate the course of time, then what is the point of telling a story in this universe? Some new writer could come along and rewrite the entire universe again just so we have something “fresh” and “new” to work with. And in another ten, the same thing (or maybe forty would be the more appropriate number, since that’s sort of how long it took to get this reboot). What about the characters? They become meaningless too, because nothing they do actually matters. It can simply be rewritten. Some characters might not exist at all and some will be replaced. This is the problem with time travel narratives as a whole. Back to the Future only works because it makes fun of itself; the series is centered around a purely comical farce and doesn’t take itself too seriously because of that. But Star Trek is not a comedy, nor based in a universe centered on a farce (at least, it’s not supposed to be). Star Trek takes itself fairly serious, because it should be a serious endeavor; the shows and movies try to address a possible future, not a farcical one (can you really take seriously a time machine built into a DeLorean or, dare I say, a hot tub?). This fact is what bothers me the most about the newest Star Trek. It is too easy and simple to rewrite the course of history, to rewrite characters and plots and entire populations of people (you can now destroy planets, never mind that the very concept of one ship taking out an entire advanced civilization is so mind-bogglingly idiotic it hurts to think about). If Abrams wanted to rewrite Star Trek, he should have ignored time altogether. Just rewrite it. Take the old, update it, make it flashier, stronger, more character driven, and so on. Don’t establish a precedent for the pointless. Or, perhaps the better idea would be to ignore the standard cast of characters and start something completely new. It’s yet to be done. Nobody has started a Star Trek movie with an unknown group of characters (or at least a group that hasn’t been talked much about within the various series) and spawned a series of films about them. What a better way to reboot a franchise than to start clean! But maybe that’s why I don’t make movies. Originality and logic seem to have fallen to the wayside in Hollywood. Thoughts? Opinions?
PCA/ACA Conference: Day Four (More Panels!)
The fourth day of my trip to the PCA/ACA conference proved to be as intellectually stimulating as the last, and it began with a fun discussion of cannibals! Here’s the recap, followed by more additions to the reading list: –The panel on cannibals in horror literature and film was somewhat disturbing. One of the panelists spent a considerable amount of time talking about rather controversial films about cannibals from the 60s and so on. Disturbing? Yes. Interesting? Very. There was also some discussion of the evolution of vampires in popular cultural consciousness and other fun things like that. –One of the panels I attended actually involved the discussion of three novels I read for the same science fiction course back when I was an undergrad (Black No More by George Schuyler, Brown Girl in the Ring by Nalo Hopkinson, and Parable of the Sower by Octavia Butler). All the papers presented had a lot to say, but I think the most interesting was the one on Butler’s novel, which talked about the different representations of community in Butler’s post-apocalyptic Earth. –The most shocking experience was having someone discuss a paper on Pokemon in such a manner that I can honestly say I was completely mind-effed. Think of it this way. Take the Master/Slave dialectic and apply it to Pokemon. Exactly. I recall groaning out loud when I saw that that paper was on a panel I wanted to go to, but looking back I can honestly say I was pleasantly surprised! Reading/Watching List:–Vampire in Brooklyn–The Historian–Der Vampir–The Giaour–The Vampyre–The Mysterious Stranger–Cannibal Holocaust–I Am Legend–Let the Right One In (book)–Otherness by David Brin–Black Empire by George Schuyler–Phillip Wegner on writing the Republic–“The Other Question” by Homi K. Bhabha–Buffy (series) There you have it!